Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How to detect Trypanosoma cruzi infection in dogs and cats?
By Enriquez, G F et al.·Published in Acta tropica·2013·Laboratorio de Eco-Epidemiologí·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Detection of Trypanosoma cruzi infection in naturally infected dogs and cats using serological, parasitological and molecular methods.
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs and cats in northeastern Argentina were tested for a parasite called Trypanosoma cruzi, which can cause serious health issues. The researchers used several methods to detect the infection, including blood tests and a new DNA test. They found that the DNA test was very effective, especially in dogs, and could be a useful tool alongside traditional blood tests. While not all infected animals were detected, the results suggest that this DNA test could help veterinarians diagnose infections more accurately.
People also search for: dog Trypanosoma cruzi infection symptoms · cat parasite test · how to treat Trypanosoma cruzi in pets
Abstract
Domestic dogs and cats are major domestic reservoir hosts of Trypanosoma cruzi and a risk factor for parasite transmission. In this study we assessed the relative performance of a polymerase chain reaction assay targeted to minicircle DNA (kDNA-PCR) in reference to conventional serological tests, a rapid dipstick test and xenodiagnosis to detect T. cruzi infection in dogs and cats from an endemic rural area in northeastern Argentina. A total of 43 dogs and 13 cats seropositive for T. cruzi by an immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and an indirect hemagglutination assay (IHA), which had been examined by xenodiagnosis, were also tested by kDNA-PCR. kDNA-PCR was nearly as sensitive as xenodiagnosis for detecting T. cruzi-infectious dogs and cats. kDNA-PCR was slightly more sensitive than xenodiagnosis in seropositive dogs (91% versus 86%, respectively) and cats (77% against 54%, respectively), but failed to detect all of the seropositive individuals. ELISA and IHA detected all xenodiagnosis-positive dogs and both outcomes largely agreed (kappa coefficient, κ=0.92), whereas both assays failed to detect all of the xenodiagnosis-positive cats and their agreement was moderate (κ=0.68). In dogs, the sensitivity of the dipstick test was 95% and agreed closely with the outcome of conventional serological tests (κ=0.82). The high sensitivity of kDNA-PCR to detect T. cruzi infections in naturally infected dogs and cats supports its application as a diagnostic tool complementary to serology and may replace the use of xenodiagnosis or hemoculture.
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/23499860/