Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
PCR test vs fungal culture for ringworm in shelter cats
By Jacobson, Linda S et al.·Published in Journal of feline medicine and surgery·2018·Toronto Humane Society, Canada·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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 real-time PCR with fungal culture for the diagnosis of Microsporum canis dermatophytosis in shelter cats: a field study.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of shelter cats with suspicious skin lesions were tested for a fungal infection called Microsporum canis, which causes ringworm. Researchers compared two methods: a quick PCR test that gives results in 1-3 days and a slower fungal culture that takes at least 14 days. The PCR test was very accurate, correctly identifying all infected cats, but it did have some false positives. While the PCR test was great for diagnosing the infection, it wasn't as reliable for confirming when the cats were cured. This quick testing method could help shelters treat and save more cats.
People also search for: cat skin lesions ringworm treatment · Microsporum canis diagnosis PCR · shelter cat fungal infection test
Abstract
Objectives Fungal culture requires at least 14 days for a final result, compared with 1-3 days for PCR. The study compared a commercial real-time dermatophyte PCR panel with fungal culture in cats in a shelter setting for: (1) diagnosis of Microsporum canis infection; and (2) determination of mycological cure. Methods This was a cross-sectional, observational study of cats with suspicious skin lesions or suspected exposure to dermatophytosis. Hair samples were collected for fungal culture and PCR prior to treatment and at weekly intervals until two negative culture results were obtained. Results One hundred and thirty-two cats were included, of which 28 (21.2%) were culture positive and 104 (78.8%) culture-negative for M canis. PCR correctly identified all culture-positive cats and 92/104 culture negative cats; there were 12 false-positive PCR results. The sensitivity and specificity of PCR were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87.7-100) and 88.5% (95% CI 80.7-93.9), respectively. Data from 17 cats were available for assessment of mycological cure. At the time of the first and second negative fungal cultures, 14/17 (82.4%) and 11/17 (64.7%) tested PCR positive, respectively. Conclusions and relevance PCR showed high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of M canis dermatophytosis compared with fungal culture, but was unreliable for identifying mycological cure. False-positive results were relatively common. There were no false-negative PCR results and a negative PCR test was a reliable finding in this study. The ability to rapidly diagnose or rule out dermatophytosis could be a valuable tool to increase life-saving capacity in animal shelters.
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/29172910/