Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Detecting tick-borne DNA in dogs treated for borreliosis
By Wodecka, Beata et al.·Published in Annals of agricultural and environmental medicine : AAEM·2009·Department of Genetics·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Detectability of tick-borne agents DNA in the blood of dogs, undergoing treatment for borreliosis.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 11 dogs diagnosed with borreliosis (a tick-borne disease) were monitored during treatment to see if the bacteria causing the infection could still be detected in their blood. Initially, 7 out of the 11 dogs tested positive for the bacteria's DNA, but this number dropped to just 3 during treatment, and all dogs tested negative after completing their therapy. The study also checked for other infections but found that only one dog had a different tick-borne infection, which did not affect how the borreliosis was treated. Overall, the treatment was effective, and the dogs recovered well.
People also search for: dog borreliosis treatment · tick-borne disease in dogs · how to treat dog lyme disease
Abstract
In the wake of controversies surrounding the usefulness of PCR in the diagnostics of borreliosis, the aim of the presented study was to monitor the presence of B. burgdorferi s.l. in dogs with clinical borreliosis in the course of relevant treatment. The monitoring was based on detecting borrelia's DNA before- (study I), during- (study II), and after completion of the therapy (study III). In addition, to rule out possible coinfections, the dogs' blood was examined for the presence of anaplasma, babesia and rickettsia. Blood samples taken from 11 dogs, with clinically detected borreliosis, were used for obtaining DNA for PCR. Positive results of PCR, with primers complementary to the fla gene, indicating the presence of DNA of B. burgdorferi s.l., were noted, in study I, in the blood of 7 dogs (63.6% dogs), in study II in 3 dogs, while in study III all blood samples were negative. In 6 out of 7 PCR+, the first study was carried out during week 1. Therefore, the PCR method is useful for monitoring early canine infections with spirochetes B. burgdorferi s.l. In all positive samples, subjected to PCR-RFLP, it was the case of a single genospecies, i.e. B. burgdorferi sensu stricto. Studies for the presence of DNA of Babesia sp., as well as DNA of Ricettsia helvetica, were negative in all samples. Anaplasma phagocytophilum DNA was detected in the blood of a single dog, and only in study I. The same dog also proved positive for the presence of borrelia DNA. Co-occurrence of both pathogens did not disturb the clinical picture of borreliosis, and the administered treatment was also effective for the mixed infection.
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/19572472/