Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Comparison of three methods for the diagnosis of otoacariasis due to Otodectes cynotis in dogs and cats.
- Journal:
- Veterinary dermatology
- Year:
- 2019
- Authors:
- Combarros, Daniel et al.
- Affiliation:
- University-ONIRIS-DPMA Unit · France
Plain-English summary
This study looked at how to best diagnose ear mites caused by a parasite called Otodectes cynotis in dogs and cats. Researchers tested three methods: looking directly into the ear with a special tool called an otoscope, using a small scoop to collect earwax, and swabbing the ear with a cotton tip. They found that the scoop method was the most effective, correctly identifying the mites in 93% of cases, while the otoscope alone was accurate 67% of the time, and the swab method only 57%. The study suggests that if a vet suspects ear mites, they should first check with an otoscope, but if that doesn't confirm the presence of mites, using the scoop method is recommended for a more reliable diagnosis.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of otoacariasis due to Otodectes cynotis is based on the visualization of the parasite, either directly by otoscopy or indirectly after microscopic examination of cerumen collected by several methods. OBJECTIVES: To compare the sensitivity of three techniques: conventional handheld otoscopy, Volkmann's curette sampling and cotton-tipped swabbing. ANIMALS: Five dogs and 12 cats (30 naturally infested ears). METHODS AND MATERIALS: For each case, following otoscopy, the order of examinations (swab or curette) was chosen randomly and the samples were observed on a slide mixed with lactophenol and covered with a coverslip. Parasite detection was noted as positive or negative and parasitic stages were counted separately. RESULTS: The diagnostic sensitivity of otoscopy alone was 67% (positive in 20 of 30 cases), using the curette sampling it was 93% (28/30) and 57% (17/30) for the swabbing. The curette technique had a significantly higher sensitivity than classic ear-swabbing (P = 0.001) or otoscopy alone (P = 0.02). Combining otoscopy and the curette, we obtained a sensitivity of 100% compared to 86% when otoscopy and swabbing were combined. Moreover, the parasite count in the curette samples (average 25 ± 30 SD) was significantly higher than the swab samples (4.5 ± 11) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: When suspecting O. cynotis infestation, otoscopic examination should be performed. To confirm the nature of the parasites observed or whenever this examination result is negative, doubtful or cannot be performed, the curettage sampling method for microscopic cerumen examination is recommended.
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: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31025463/