Seropositivity rates for agents of canine vector-borne diseases in Spain: a multicentre study

Abstract

BackgroundControlling canine vector-borne diseases (CVBD) is a major concern, since some of these diseases are serious zoonoses. This study was designed to determine seropositivity rates in Spain for agents causing the following five CVBD: leishmaniosis (Leishmania infantum: Li), heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis: Di), ehrlichiosis (Ehrlichia canis: Ec), anaplasmosis (Anaplasma phagocytophilum/Anaplasma platys: An) and Lyme disease (Borrelia burgdorferi: Bb).MethodsAnti-An, -Bb, and -Ec antibodies and the Di antigen were determined using the 4DX SNAP® Test (IDEXX Laboratories) and anti-L. infantum (Li) antibodies using the Leishmania SNAP® Test (IDEXX Laboratories) in blood and/or serum samples.ResultsAmong 1100 dogs examined, overall seropositivity rates were: Li (15.7%), Ec (5%), An (3.1%), Di (1.25%) and Bb (0.4%). While seropositivity towards Bb and Di was similar in all geographic regions, rates were significantly higher in the east of Spain (8.3%) for An, significantly higher in the north (20%) for Ec, and significantly higher in the Southeast (46.6%) and South (27.4%), and significantly lower in the north (0%) for Li.No statistical associations were observed between sex and the CVBD analyzed (p ≥ 0.05) while the following associations with other variables were detected: a higher seropositivity to Ec (40%) and Bb (6.7%) in dogs under one year of age compared with adults (p < 0.05); and a higher seropositivity to An and Li in dogs that lived outdoors versus indoors (p = 0.01; p < 0.001, respectively). Seropositivity rates of 2.1%, 0%, 1.7%, 0.5% and 4.2% were recorded respectively for An, Bb, Ec, Di and Li in dogs with no clinical signs (n = 556) versus 3.8%, 0.6%, 7.5%, 1.8% and 25.9% for those with signs (n = 507) suggestive of a CVBD.ConclusionThe data obtained indicate a risk for dogs in Spain of acquiring any of the five CVBD examined. Veterinarians in the different regions should include these diseases in their differential diagnoses and recommend the use of repellents and other prophylactic measures to prevent disease transmission by arthropod vectors. Public health authorities also need to become more involved in the problem, since some of the CVBD examined here also affect humans.

Geographic distribution of canine heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) infection in stray dogs of eastern Romania

“…A possible explanation for the previous failure to detect positive cases here is that the antigen test may have given false negatives in dogs with low parasitic burdens or in blood samples from those infected only by male worms (American Heartworm Society, 2014). However, also the low-level prevalence in Iași county revealed in our study is important because, as reported by Miro et al (2013), D. immitis may serve as a reservoir of infection for other animals in low-incidence areas.…”

Current Surveys of the Seroprevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Leishmania infantum, Babesia canis, Angiostrongylus vasorum and Dirofilaria immitis in Dogs in Bulgaria

“…While in the study of Volgina et al (2013) the age of negative tested dogs was lower (2.6 years), this was not observed for the present study (n = 59; 5.8 years). In another study from Spain, even higher seropositivity for E. canis and B. burgdorferi was observed in younger dogs (< 1 year) compared to adult dogs, while no differences in the rates recorded for Anaplasma spp., D. immitis or L. infantum were identified (Miró et al 2013). Overall, different studies also failed to find any association between gender and CVBDs analysed (e.g.…”

“…Overall, different studies also failed to find any association between gender and CVBDs analysed (e.g. Villleneuve et al 2011;Miró et al 2013 Gaunt et al 2010;Dyachenko et al 2012). In fact, a potential co-infection with A. platys and E. canis is even more probable considering that they use the same tick vector (R. sanguineus), and that, based on previous studies, this latter tick appears to be a common ectoparasite of dogs in Bulgaria (Kirkova et al 2013).…”

Seroprevalence Of IgG Antibodies Against Borrelia burgdorferi In Dogs In Belgrade Area, Serbia

“…In the Netherlands, Goossens et al [34] found a relatively high (17%), seroprevalence of B. burgdorferi among dogs of using whole-cell ELISA. On the other hand, lower seroprevalence rates in apparently healthy dogs were detected in Portugal (0.2%), Spain (0.4%), and Latvia (2.5%) [35][36][37]. Low seroprevalence of B. burgdorferi found among dogs in these countries could be explained by their position at the northern and southern borders of I. ricinus areal, where activity of ticks is spatially and temporally restricted, and consecutively exposure of dogs to Borreliae vectors is lower.…”