Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Painful ear infection with Malassezia yeast in dogs explained
By Nunes Rodrigues, Tania C & Vandenabeele, Sophie I·Published in BMC veterinary research·2021·Small Animal Department·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Pilot study of dogs with suppurative and non-suppurative Malassezia otitis: A case series.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs with painful ear infections caused by a yeast called Malassezia was treated successfully. Three dogs had a more severe form of the infection, known as suppurative Malassezia otitis, which presented with painful symptoms and discharge from the ears. One dog had a combination of this severe form and a more typical ear infection. All dogs responded well to treatment, although the exact cause of their infections remains unclear.
People also search for: dog ear infection treatment · Malassezia otitis in dogs · why is my dog shaking his head · dog ear discharge causes
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rarely, Malassezia otitis presents as a painful, erosive otitis with an otic discharge containing Malassezia and neutrophils on cytology. There are no published reports of this type of suppurative Malassezia otitis (SMO). The role of Malassezia hypersensitivity in otitis is still unknown, and no association has been demonstrated with SMO. We compared Malassezia IgE levels, intradermal test and histology changes in SMO dogs with the more conventional Malassezia otitis (MO) presentation. RESULTS: Three dogs (case 1, case 2 and case 3) were diagnosed with SMO, one dog (case 4) was diagnosed with unilateral MO and unilateral SMO, and one dog (case 5) was diagnosed with MO. Only one case (case 4) with SMO/MO had a positive Intradermal Allergy Test (IDAT) and elevated IgE levels for Malassezia. Histopathology findings from SMO revealed: interface dermatitis (case 1 and 3), lymphocytic dermatitis (case 2) and chronic hyperplastic eosinophilic and lymphoplasmacytic dermatitis (case 4). Histopathology findings from MO showed perivascular dermatitis (case 4 and 5). All the cases were treated successfully. CONCLUSIONS: SMO presents with a distinct clinical phenotype in comparison with conventional MO. No consistent aetiology could be isolated. In these clinical cases it is possible that previous treatments could have influenced the results. More research is needed to understand the possible aetiologies and the pathogenesis of SMO.
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/34794441/