Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Accuracy of 4 Giardia tests in dogs with chronic silent infection
By Rishniw, M et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2010·Department of Clinical Sciences, United States·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Comparison of 4 Giardia diagnostic tests in diagnosis of naturally acquired canine chronic subclinical giardiasis.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 20 dogs with chronic Giardia infections were tested using four different methods to see which was best at detecting the parasite. The tests included two that looked for Giardia cysts and two that checked for fecal antigens. While all tests showed good results when Giardia was present, they didn't always agree with the most reliable method. This means that while the tests can help rule out Giardia when it's not there, they might not be as reliable for confirming its presence. Pet owners should discuss testing options with their vet if they suspect their dog has Giardia.
People also search for: dog diarrhea Giardia test · symptoms of Giardia in dogs · best Giardia test for dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The performance of Giardia diagnostic tests that detect either cysts or fecal antigens has not been thoroughly examined. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: We examined the concordance and agreement among 4 Giardia diagnostic tests (2 cyst and 2 coproantigen detection methods) in a colony of dogs chronically and subclinically infected with Giardia. ANIMALS: Twenty dogs with chronic, subclinical Giardia infection. METHODS: Giardia diagnostic tests were performed repeatedly on each dog over 120 days. Fecal cyst detection methods (ZnSO4 flotation and fluorescent antibody [FAB] coproscopy) were performed 3 times per week. Coproantigen methods (Giardia SNAP test and quantitative ELISA) were performed weekly. Results were analyzed and compared among methods. RESULTS: When compared with FAB coproscopy, all of the in-house diagnostic tests had excellent positive predictive values (PPVs, 95-99%) at the study prevalence (89%). At lower prevalence rates, ZnSO4, SNAP, and ELISA tests all had good negative predictive values (NPVs), but poor PPVs. There was poor to good agreement among tests by kappa analysis. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings show that most commonly used in-house Giardia diagnostic tests have poor agreement with the gold standard method (FAB coproscopy). The in-house tests have good NPVs, but poor PPVs, at prevalence rates common in most clinical settings.
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/20136713/