Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Vector-borne diseases found in shelter dogs in central Spain
By Couto, C Guillermo et al.·Published in Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.)·2010·Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, United States·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Serological study of selected vector-borne diseases in shelter dogs in central Spain using point-of-care assays.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 131 shelter dogs in central Spain were tested for several diseases spread by ticks and mosquitoes, including Ehrlichia and Leishmania. The tests showed that 19% of the dogs had been exposed to Anaplasma, while 5.3% had Ehrlichia or Leishmania. Interestingly, none of the dogs tested positive for heartworm or Lyme disease. Despite these findings, there was no clear link between the test results and whether the dogs appeared healthy or sick. This suggests that while these tests can help understand disease exposure in shelters, they may not always indicate a dog's current health status.
People also search for: dog tick disease symptoms · shelter dog health check · Anaplasma treatment in dogs
Abstract
We evaluated the prevalence of selected vector-borne diseases in 131 dogs in an animal shelter in central Spain using point-of-care assays (SNAP 4DX and SNAP Leishmania; IDEXX Laboratories, Westbrook, ME). The SNAP 4DX detects Dirofilaria immitis (Di) antigen and antibodies against Ehrlichia canis (Ec), Borrelia burgdorferi (Bb), and Anaplasma phagocytophylum (Aph); the SNAP Leishmania kit detects antibodies against Leishmania infantum (Li). Dogs were classified as healthy or sick based on physical examination, complete blood counts, and serum chemistry profiles. The prevalence of positive test results was as follows: Ec, 5.3% (n = 7); Aph, 19.0% (n = 25); Bb, 0%; Di, 0%; and Li, 5.3% (n = 7). Four dogs (3%) were coexposed to Ec and Aph, and three dogs (2.3%) were coexposed to Aph and Li. There was no statistically significant correlation between positive serology and clinical status (sick vs. healthy) or hematologic/biochemical abnormalities. The prevalence of Aph was the highest and is in agreement with a recent report in a dog shelter in northwestern Spain. These point-of-care assays may be more valuable as epidemiologic than as clinical tools.
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/20420531/