Diagnostic testing for feline panleukopenia in a shelter setting: a prospective, observational study

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to optimize the diagnosis of feline panleukopenia virus (FPV) in a shelter setting by: (1) comparing the results of the canine parvovirus IDEXX SNAP Parvo (SNAP) point-of-care ELISA with a commercial FPV quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) test; (2) assessing whether vomit and anal/rectal swabs could be used for early diagnosis; and (3) clarifying the interpretation of weak-positive SNAP test results. Methods The study included shelter cats and kittens with incomplete or unknown vaccination history that had clinical signs suspicious for feline panleukopenia and fecal SNAP and PCR tests performed within 24 h of onset. Feces, anal/rectal swabs and vomit were tested using SNAP and PCR, with fecal PCR utilized as the reference standard. Results One hundred and forty-five cats were included. Seventeen were diagnosed with FPV infection and 62 were negative; 66 could not be individually designated because they were co-housed. Sensitivity was as follows: fecal SNAP 55% (n = 102; 95% confidence interval [CI] 32–77); swab SNAP 30% (n = 55; 95% CI 7–65); swab PCR 77% (n = 55; 95% CI 46–95); and vomit PCR 100% (n = 17; 95% CI 16–100). Specificity was high (96–100%) for all sample and test types. For PCR-positive fecal samples, true-positive SNAP tests (including weak positives) had significantly higher DNA viral copy numbers than false-negative SNAP tests ( P = 0.0031). Conclusions and relevance The SNAP ELISA should be viewed as an initial diagnostic test to rule in feline panleukopenia. Positive fecal SNAP test results, including weak positives, are highly likely to be true positives in clinically affected animals. Negative results in clinically affected animals are unreliable and should be followed up with PCR testing.

Parvovirus-Infektionen bei Katzen in Tierheimen

“…ein Blutbild) eingeleitet werden. Die Spezifität verfügbarer POC-Tests ist mit 94% bis 100% 79 80 sehr hoch, sodass ein positives Ergebnis beweisend für eine Parvovirus-Infektion ist. Allerdings können POC-Tests bei Katzen nicht verwendet werden, um eine Parvovirus-Infektion (bei negativem Ergebnis) auszuschließen, da die Sensitivität zu niedrig ist 79 80 .…”

Isolation and molecular characterization of feline panleukopenia viruses from Korean cats

“…The clinical signs of FPV infection in cats include a high fever, anorexia, vomiting, and hemorrhagic diarrhea; about half of all infected animals die [10]. Virus neutralization, hemagglutination inhibition, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays of canine parvovirus (CPV) have been used to detect anti-FPV antibodies in cat sera [11,12]. The methods of diagnosing FPV infection include isolation of the virus, immunofluorescence, a one-step immunochromatographic assay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [13].…”

Point-of-care testing in companion and food animal disease diagnostics

“…Lateral flow immunoassays are currently available for canine parvovirus, Ehrlichia, Giardia, Lyme disease, feline leukemia, Cryptococcus, and feline immunodeficiency (4,(11)(12)(13). A parvovirus SNAP ELISA (IDEXX Laboratories Inc.) has been used as a reliable POCT to diagnose feline panleukopenia and the test has comparable specificity but less sensitivity compared to feline parvovirus PCR (14).…”