PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Tick-borne diseases in dogs from northern Australia and risk factors

By Hii, S F et al.·Published in Australian veterinary journal·2015·School of Veterinary Science, Australia·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Canine tick-borne pathogens and associated risk factors in dogs presenting with and without clinical signs consistent with tick-borne diseases in northern Australia.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of dogs in northern Australia was tested for tick-borne diseases after showing symptoms or having no signs at all. About 24% of the dogs with symptoms and 12% of those without were found to be infected with various tick-borne pathogens. The study found that male dogs and those from the Northern Territory were more likely to be infected. The most common pathogen identified was a type of mycoplasma. This highlights the importance of testing for tick-borne diseases, even in dogs that appear healthy, especially in certain regions.

People also search for: dog tick disease symptoms · male dog tick-borne infection risk · northern Australia dog health issues

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the proportion of canine tick-borne disease (CTBD) pathogens in dogs from northern states of Australia presenting with and without clinical signs/laboratory abnormalities suggestive of CTBD and to evaluate associated risk factors. DESIGN: Client-owned dogs presented to a general practice clinic in the Northern Territory (NT; n = 138) and five referral hospitals in south-east Queensland (SEQ; n = 100) were grouped into CTBD-suspect and -control groups based on clinical and laboratory criteria. Blood and sera were screened for haemotropic Mycoplasma spp., Babesia spp., Anaplasma spp., Ehrlichia spp. and Hepatozoon spp. using microscopic examination, in-clinic ELISA testing and PCR assays. Dog-specific risk factors associated with the presence of CTBD pathogens were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 24.4% of the suspect group and 12.2% of the control group dogs were infected. The proportions of M. haemocanis, B. vogeli, A. platys, Candidatus Mycoplasma haematoparvum, and C. Mycoplasma haemobos were 7.1%, 5.0%, 3.8%, 1.7% and 0.4%, respectively. Dogs originating from the NT were 3.6-fold (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51-8.62; P = 0.004) more likely to be infected with CTBD pathogens than those from SEQ. Male dogs were 2.3-fold (95% CI 1.17-4.80, P = 0.024) more likely to be PCR-positive to CTBD pathogens than female dogs. Dogs presenting with clinical signs consistent with CTBD and thrombocytopenia were more likely to be infected by CTBD pathogens (odds ratio 2.85; 95% CI 1.16, 7.02; P = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Haemotropic mycoplasmas were the most common tick-borne pathogen infecting client-owned dogs. Subclinical cases were common in dogs from the NT. Veterinary practitioners should be aware of the proportion of CTBD pathogens and the presenting features of clinical and subclinical disease in their area.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25708788/