Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Brucellosis exposure and risk factors in dogs in eastern Australia
By Kneipp, Catherine C et al.·Published in Frontiers in veterinary science·2021·Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, Australia·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Seroprevalence and Associated Risk Factors in Dogs in Eastern Australia, 2016 to 2019.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of hunting dogs in eastern Australia was tested for exposure to a disease linked to feral pigs, with 21 out of 317 dogs showing signs of infection. The study found that about 9 out of every 100 dogs at risk were seropositive, particularly in central west New South Wales and southern Queensland. Dogs that lived with other infected dogs or traveled to hunt were more likely to test positive. However, the dogs did not show clear symptoms that could help identify those infected. More research is needed to understand how this disease spreads among dogs.
People also search for: dog hunting disease symptoms · feral pig exposure in dogs · brucellosis in dogs treatment
Abstract
is a zoonotic disease of feral pigs that also affects pig hunting dogs, pig hunters, veterinarians and veterinary staff. In recent years the incidence ofin the eastern Australian states of New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland (QLD) has increased. A cross-sectional study was conducted to document the seroprevalence, geographical extent and risk factors forin dogs at-risk of contracting the disease. Eligible dogs were those that were known to hunt or consume feral pig meat. Dogs were enrolled through private veterinary clinics and/or directly by District Veterinarians in six regions of NSW and QLD. Blood was collected by venepuncture and tested forantibodies using the Rose Bengal Test (RBT) followed by a Complement Fixation Test (CFT) if they returned a positive RBT. Owners were invited to complete a questionnaire on the dogs' signalment, husbandry including hunting practices and locations, and any clinical signs referable to brucellosis. Of the 317 dogs included in the prevalence survey, 21 were seropositive returning a survey-adjusted true seroprevalence of 9.3 (95% CI 0.45 to 18)positive dogs per 100 dogs at-risk. True seroprevalence ranged from 0 to 24positive dogs per 100 across eastern Australia, with the highest prevalence in central west NSW and southern QLD. Adjusted for other factors, dogs that shared a household with other seropositive dogs and those that traveled away from their home regions to hunt were more likely to be seropositive. Clinical signs at presentation were not predictive of serostatus, with seropositive and seronegative dogs equally likely to present with signs consistent with brucellosis. The results obtained from this study show thatexposure is relatively common in dogs that have contact with feral pigs, with one in 10 testing seropositive. Further studies are needed to understand the progression and risk of transmission from seropositive dogs.
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/34621810/