Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Comparing two test kits for diagnosing visceral leishmaniosis in dogs
By Lira, R A et al.·Published in Veterinary parasitology·2006·Departamento de Imunologia, Brazil·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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 visceral leishmaniosis: a comparative analysis of the EIE-leishmaniose-visceral-canina-Bio-Manguinhos and the IFI-leishmaniose-visceral-canina-Bio-Manguinhos kits.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs suspected of having canine visceral leishmaniasis (CVL) were tested using two different kits to see which was more effective at detecting the disease. The EIE-LVC kit showed a sensitivity of 72%, while the IFI-LVC kit had a sensitivity of 68%. When both tests were used together, they were able to identify more positive cases, with a combined sensitivity of 92%. This means that using both tests at the same time can help catch more cases of CVL, which is important for treatment and management.
People also search for: dog leishmaniasis symptoms · canine visceral leishmaniasis treatment · how to test for leishmaniasis in dogs
Abstract
This study evaluated the performance of the EIE-leishmaniose-visceral-canina-Bio-Manguinhos (EIE-LVC) kit and to compare it with that of the IFI-leishmaniose-visceral-canina-Bio-Manguinhos (IFI-LVC) kit. Four groups of dogs were studied: group 1 (G1), dogs with clinical signs indicative of CVL and testing positive for the parasite (n = 25); group 2 (G2), dogs with only a presumed diagnosis of CVL (n = 62); group 3 (G3), dogs that had never lived in an area where CVL is endemic and never received a blood transfusion (n = 16); group 4 (G4), dogs carrying other parasites: such as babesiosis (n = 4), ehrlichiosis (n = 6) and demodicosis (n = 1). G1 and G3 were used for the calculation of sensitivity and specificity, respectively. The EIE-LVC showed a sensitivity of 72% (IC 95%: 50.4-87.1%) and a specificity of 87.5% (IC 95%: 60.4-97.8%). The value of the kappa index was 0.975 (CI 95%: 0.926-1.024), which represents an excellent fit. For IFI-LVC, the sensitivity was 68.0% (CI 95%: 46.4-84.3%) and the specificity 87.5% (CI 95%: 60.4-97.8%). When the tests were conducted in parallel, sensitivity was 92.0% (CI 95%: 72.5-98.6%) and specificity 75.0% (CI 95%: 47.4-91.7%). However, when conducted consecutively, the tests showed a sensitivity of 48.0% (CI 95%: 28.3-68.2%) and a specificity of 100.0% (CI 95%: 75.9-99.4%). The analysis of clinically suspected dogs using IFI-LVC and EIE-LVC kits in parallel, revealed that 26/62 animals were positive. Cross-reaction was observed in a dog with demodicosis. These results lead to the following conclusions: (1) the performance of the EIE-LVC kit is not statistically different from the IFI-LVC and (2) the kits must be used in parallel if higher sensitivity is required, reducing the number of false-negative results.
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/16446034/