PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

How two PCR tests compare to blood test for diagnosing dog

By Paula L. Martin et al.·Published in Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira·2019·View original on DOAJ

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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Diagnosis of canine leptospirosis: evaluation of two PCR assays in comparison with the microagglutination test

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of dogs suspected of having leptospirosis, a serious bacterial infection, were tested using two different PCR tests alongside a standard blood test. The PCR tests were able to confirm the presence of the bacteria in some cases more quickly than the traditional method. Out of 51 dogs tested, seven were confirmed to have leptospirosis, with one of the PCR tests detecting the bacteria in six of those cases. These findings suggest that using PCR tests can help veterinarians diagnose leptospirosis more efficiently.

People also search for: dog leptospirosis symptoms · how to test for leptospirosis in dogs · dog leptospirosis treatment options

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Canine leptospirosis is definitely diagnosed by demonstrating seroconversion in paired serum samples from the acute and convalescent period by the microagglutination test (MAT). However, the application of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay can provide earlier confirmation of suspected cases. The objective of this study was to evaluate two PCR assays used in diagnosis of human leptospirosis (lipL32 real-time PCR and rrs conventional PCR) in cultured microorganisms and experimentally contaminated samples (whole blood, serum, urine), and investigate their applicability in clinical samples from dogs with presumptive diagnosis of leptospirosis by using the MAT as a reference. The analytical sensitivity of the lipL32 real-time PCR was 1 genome equivalent per reaction, whereas that for the rrs conventional PCR was 10 genome equivalents per reaction. Both assays amplified the pathogenic strains but were negative when evaluating the DNA of other microorganisms that may be present in clinical samples. The lipL32 real-time PCR detected 100 bacteria/mL in whole blood samples, 1000 bacteria/mL in serum samples and 10 bacteria/mL in urine samples, whereas the rrs conventional PCR detected 1000 bacteria/mL in whole blood and serum samples and 100 bacteria/mL in urine samples. Seven out of the 51 samples from dogs with presumptive diagnosis of leptospirosis were considered as confirmed cases. ThelipL32 real-time PCR detected positive results in six of the seven confirmed cases, whereas the rrs conventional PCR detected four. The PCR assays evaluated proved to be useful diagnostic tools in the confirmation of canine leptospirosis when used together with the MAT.

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 DOAJ: https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-5150-pvb-5868