PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Test for diagnosing Brucella canis infection in dogs evaluated

By Keid, L B et al.·Published in Reproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene·2015·Departamento de Medicina Veterin&#xe1, Brazil·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Evaluation of an Immunochromatographic Test to the Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis Caused by Brucella canis.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of dogs suspected of having brucellosis, an infection caused by Brucella canis, underwent various tests to confirm their diagnosis. The immunochromatographic test (ICT) showed high accuracy in identifying infected dogs, but it missed about 10% of cases that were confirmed by other methods like blood culture and PCR. While the ICT is quick and easy to use, it isn't reliable enough to be the only test for screening dogs for this infection. For the best results, veterinarians may need to use multiple testing methods to ensure accurate diagnosis and prevent the spread of the disease.

People also search for: dog brucellosis symptoms · canine brucellosis test accuracy · how to test dog for brucellosis

Abstract

This study evaluated the performance of an immunochromatographic test (ICT) for the diagnosis of canine brucellosis caused by Brucella canis, comparing its results with that of the rapid slide agglutination test with and without the use of 2-mercaptoethanol and the agar gel immunodiffusion test (AGID). The microbiological culture, PCR and clinical examination were used as reference. According to the results obtained in clinical examination, blood culture, culture of semen and vaginal swab and PCR in blood, semen and vaginal swab, a total of 102 dogs were divided into three groups: B. canis-infected dogs (Group 1), B. canis-non-infected dogs (Group 2) and dogs with suspected brucellosis (Group 3). The diagnostic sensitivity of RSAT, 2ME-RSAT, AGID and ICT in Group 1 was, respectively, 75%, 37.5%, 27.8% and 89.58%. The diagnostic specificity of RSAT, 2ME-RSAT, AGID and ICT in Group 2 was, respectively, 91%, 100%, 100%, and 100%. In dogs with suspected brucellosis, 9.67% were RSAT positive, none was positive by 2ME-RSAT, 3.22% were AGID positive and 6.45% were ICT positive. The main drawback concerning canine brucellosis diagnosis is the lack of a highly sensitive serological assay to be used as a screening test to the rapid identification of infected animals. The ICT showed a high diagnostic specificity and a diagnostic sensitivity value greater than that observed in the RSAT, 2ME-RSAT and AGID. However, 10.41% of infected dogs had negative results by ICT. These dogs were positive by microbiological culture and/or PCR, indicating active infection and consequently a higher potential of spreading Brucella. Although rapid and simple to perform, the ICT lacked sensitivity to be used as a screening test.

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/26489371/