Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Accuracy of a quick dog parvovirus test for diarrhea diagnosis
By Decaro, N et al.·Published in Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997)·2013·Department of Veterinary Medicine, Italy·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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 in-clinic assay for the diagnosis of canine parvovirus.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study tested a new in-clinic test for diagnosing canine parvovirus (CPV) in dogs with severe diarrhea. The test was compared to other methods and showed good accuracy, detecting CPV in about 70% of cases. It was particularly effective for different strains of the virus, making it a reliable option for vets. This means that if your dog is showing signs of diarrhea and is suspected to have parvovirus, this new test could help your veterinarian confirm the diagnosis quickly and accurately.
People also search for: dog diarrhea parvovirus test · canine parvovirus symptoms · how to treat parvovirus in dogs
Abstract
The results of a study designed to evaluate the performance of an in-clinic test for the detection of canine parvovirus (CPV) are reported. A total of 150 faecal samples collected from dogs with acute diarrhoea were tested using the in-clinic test, a haemagglutination assay (HA) and a real-time PCR assay for CPV detection, quantification and characterisation. CPV was detected in 66, 73, and 101 faecal samples by in-clinic, HA and PCR testing, respectively. The relative sensitivity and specificity of the in-clinic test were 86.3% and 96.1%, respectively, when the test was compared to HA, and 65.3% and 100%, respectively, when compared to real-time PCR. The sample distribution according to the virus type was CPV-2a, n=44; CPV-2b, n=11; CPV-2c, n=44, CPV-2, n=2, as determined by minor groove binder probe assays and/or sequence analysis. The percentage of positive in-clinic tests was 70.5% for CPV-2a, 72.7% for CPV-2b and 75.0% for CPV-2c (P>0.05). Using real-time PCR as the reference standard for CPV detection, the in-clinic test was more specific than HA and had comparable sensitivity to HA, demonstrating detection rates similar to those previously observed for other rapid in-clinic tests. The in-clinic test was also able to detect all CPV types at equivalent rates.
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/24100133/