Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How well rapid tests find parvovirus infection in dogs
By Shima, Felix K et al.·Published in Topics in companion animal medicine·2021·Department of Veterinary Medicine·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Diagnostic Performance of a Rapid Immunochromatographic Test Kit for Detecting Canine Parvovirus Infection.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 115 dogs with vomiting and diarrhea were tested for canine parvovirus (CPV) infection using a rapid test kit. The test kit was able to detect CPV in about 91% of the samples, which is comparable to a more complex lab test called PCR. While the rapid test is helpful for quickly screening dogs for CPV, negative results should be confirmed with PCR if there is still a strong suspicion of infection. This test kit can be particularly useful in areas without access to full laboratory facilities.
People also search for: dog vomiting diarrhea parvovirus test · canine parvovirus rapid test accuracy · how to treat dog parvovirus
Abstract
In dogs, canine parvovirus (CPV) enteritis is associated with high morbidity and fatality rates requiring early diagnosis to facilitate treatment and reduce its spread. In recent times, various commercial immunochromatographic (IC) test kits are available for its rapid diagnosis, which require an assessment of their accuracy. Therefore, precision of a point-of-care IC combination test kit for canine coronavirus (CCoV)/CPV faecal antigen detection was evaluated in this study. Multicentred random faecal samples from 115 dogs with gastroenteritis were checked for the presence of CPV antigens using the SensPERT IC combination test kit and the result was compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as a reference test. Parvovirus was detected in 105 (91.3%) and 108 (93.9%) faecal samples by the point-of-care test kit and PCR, respectively. The point-of-care IC test kit showed 95.4% relative sensitivity, 71.4% specificity, 98.1% positive predictive value, 50.0% negative predictive value, and 93.9% accuracy comparable to conventional PCR in the samples tested. This point-of-care test kit also demonstrated a fair positive likelihood ratio (3.34), a very low negative likelihood ratio (0.07) and a moderate agreement (Kappa = 0.6) compared with conventional PCR. This test kit has shown to be very useful in the screening of dogs for CPV infection, and is a reliable alternative for diagnosing CPV both in conventional laboratories and remote areas without laboratories. Negative results in the IC testing with high suspicion of CPV infection should be further confirmed using superior test such as PCR.
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/34119705/