Improving cestode diagnosis in domestic dogs and cats: the need for accurate and non-invasive techniques

IF 2.4 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Georgiana Deak, Adriana Györke, Cristina Daniela Pop, Viorica Mircean
{"title":"Improving cestode diagnosis in domestic dogs and cats: the need for accurate and non-invasive techniques","authors":"Georgiana Deak,&nbsp;Adriana Györke,&nbsp;Cristina Daniela Pop,&nbsp;Viorica Mircean","doi":"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cestode infections in companion animals pose a significant diagnostic challenge due to intermittent egg shedding and the limitations of traditional coproscopic techniques. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of microscopy and PCR in detecting cestodes in dogs and cats, using necropsy as the gold standard.</div><div>A total of 81 animals (46 dogs and 35 cats) were examined by necropsy, with gastrointestinal tracts inspected for cestodes. Fecal samples were collected and analyzed by coproscopy and PCR targeting cestode infections.</div><div>Necropsy identified cestodes in 7 (8.6 %; 95 % CI: 4.3 – 16.8) out of 81 animals: <em>Dipylidium caninum</em> was found in 3 (3.7 %; 95 % CI: 1.3 – 10.3) of animals (1/46 dogs; 2/35 cats), and <em>Hydatigera taeniaeformis</em> in 4 (11.4 %; 95 % CI: 4.5 – 26.0) out of 35 cats. Coproscopy and PCR detected only infection with <em>H. taeniaeformis</em> in 2 (5.7 %; 95 % CI: 1.6 – 18.6), and 3 (8.6 %; 95 CI: 3.0–22.4) cats, respectively., No PCR positives were recorded for <em>D. caninum</em>, despite its presence at necropsy. Overall agreement with necropsy was moderate for both methods (coproscopy k = 0.42; PCR k = 0.58), with higher sensitivity and agreement for <em>Taenia</em> spp. and <em>H. taeniaeformis</em> detection. These findings highlight the poor sensitivity of current non-invasive diagnostic methods for cestodes, particularly <em>D. caninum</em>, and the limited correlation between infection intensity and fecal detection. The study advocates for the urgent need for a commercially available coproantigen test to improve the accuracy of diagnosis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20413,"journal":{"name":"Preventive veterinary medicine","volume":"244 ","pages":"Article 106654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Preventive veterinary medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587725002399","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cestode infections in companion animals pose a significant diagnostic challenge due to intermittent egg shedding and the limitations of traditional coproscopic techniques. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of microscopy and PCR in detecting cestodes in dogs and cats, using necropsy as the gold standard.
A total of 81 animals (46 dogs and 35 cats) were examined by necropsy, with gastrointestinal tracts inspected for cestodes. Fecal samples were collected and analyzed by coproscopy and PCR targeting cestode infections.
Necropsy identified cestodes in 7 (8.6 %; 95 % CI: 4.3 – 16.8) out of 81 animals: Dipylidium caninum was found in 3 (3.7 %; 95 % CI: 1.3 – 10.3) of animals (1/46 dogs; 2/35 cats), and Hydatigera taeniaeformis in 4 (11.4 %; 95 % CI: 4.5 – 26.0) out of 35 cats. Coproscopy and PCR detected only infection with H. taeniaeformis in 2 (5.7 %; 95 % CI: 1.6 – 18.6), and 3 (8.6 %; 95 CI: 3.0–22.4) cats, respectively., No PCR positives were recorded for D. caninum, despite its presence at necropsy. Overall agreement with necropsy was moderate for both methods (coproscopy k = 0.42; PCR k = 0.58), with higher sensitivity and agreement for Taenia spp. and H. taeniaeformis detection. These findings highlight the poor sensitivity of current non-invasive diagnostic methods for cestodes, particularly D. caninum, and the limited correlation between infection intensity and fecal detection. The study advocates for the urgent need for a commercially available coproantigen test to improve the accuracy of diagnosis.
改善家养狗和猫的寄生虫诊断:对准确和非侵入性技术的需求
由于间歇性的卵子脱落和传统阴道镜技术的局限性,伴侣动物的寄生虫感染构成了一个重大的诊断挑战。本研究旨在以尸检为金标准,评估显微镜和PCR检测狗和猫的囊虫的性能。共有81只动物(46只狗和35只猫)进行了尸检,检查了胃肠道是否有寄生虫。收集粪便标本,采用粪镜检查和PCR方法对寄生虫感染进行分析。尸检发现有7例(8.6 %;95 % CI: 4.3 - 16.8),在81只动物中发现了3只犬双螺旋绦虫(3.7 %;95% % CI: 1.3 - 10.3)的动物(1/46狗;2/35只猫),带绦虫4只(11.4% %;95 % CI: 4.5 - 26.0)。Coproscopy和PCR仅检出2例(5.7% %;95 % CI: 1.6 - 18.6), 3(8.6 %;95 CI: 3.0-22.4)猫。尽管在尸检中发现犬D. caninum,但没有PCR阳性记录。两种方法与尸检的总体一致性中等(coproscopy k = 0.42;PCR k = 0.58),对带绦虫和带绦虫检测具有较高的灵敏度和一致性。这些发现强调了目前的非侵入性诊断方法对绦虫,特别是犬D.的敏感性较差,感染强度与粪便检测之间的相关性有限。该研究提倡迫切需要一种商用的助原抗原检测来提高诊断的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Preventive veterinary medicine
Preventive veterinary medicine 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
184
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Preventive Veterinary Medicine is one of the leading international resources for scientific reports on animal health programs and preventive veterinary medicine. The journal follows the guidelines for standardizing and strengthening the reporting of biomedical research which are available from the CONSORT, MOOSE, PRISMA, REFLECT, STARD, and STROBE statements. The journal focuses on: Epidemiology of health events relevant to domestic and wild animals; Economic impacts of epidemic and endemic animal and zoonotic diseases; Latest methods and approaches in veterinary epidemiology; Disease and infection control or eradication measures; The "One Health" concept and the relationships between veterinary medicine, human health, animal-production systems, and the environment; Development of new techniques in surveillance systems and diagnosis; Evaluation and control of diseases in animal populations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信