Cargando…
Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis
Canine brucellosis caused by Brucella canis, is an infectious disease affecting dogs and wild Canidae. Clinical diagnosis is challenging, and laboratory testing is crucial for a definitive diagnosis. Various serological methods have been described, but their accuracy is uncertain due to limited vali...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10536495/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37764006 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11092162 |
_version_ | 1785112879048949760 |
---|---|
author | Perletta, Fabrizia Di Pancrazio, Chiara Rodomonti, Diamante Di Febo, Tiziana Luciani, Mirella Krasteva, Ivanka Marinova Maggetti, Marta Profeta, Francesca Salini, Romolo De Massis, Fabrizio Sacchini, Flavio Tittarelli, Manuela |
author_facet | Perletta, Fabrizia Di Pancrazio, Chiara Rodomonti, Diamante Di Febo, Tiziana Luciani, Mirella Krasteva, Ivanka Marinova Maggetti, Marta Profeta, Francesca Salini, Romolo De Massis, Fabrizio Sacchini, Flavio Tittarelli, Manuela |
author_sort | Perletta, Fabrizia |
collection | PubMed |
description | Canine brucellosis caused by Brucella canis, is an infectious disease affecting dogs and wild Canidae. Clinical diagnosis is challenging, and laboratory testing is crucial for a definitive diagnosis. Various serological methods have been described, but their accuracy is uncertain due to limited validation studies. The present study aimed to evaluate the performances of three serological tests for the diagnosis of B. canis in comparison with bacterial isolation (gold standard), in order to establish a protocol for the serological diagnosis of canine brucellosis. A panel of sera from naturally infected dogs (n = 61), from which B. canis was isolated, and uninfected dogs (n = 143), negative for B. canis isolation, were tested using microplate serum agglutination (mSAT), complement fixation performed using the Brucella ovis antigen (B. ovis-CFT), and a commercial immunofluorescence assay (IFAT). The sensitivity and specificity of the three serological methods were, respectively, the following: 96.7% (95% CI 88.8–98.7%) and 92.3 (95% CI 86.7–95.1%) for mSAT; 96.7% (95% CI 88.8–98.7%) and 96.5 (95% CI 92.1–98.2%) for B. ovis-CFT; 98.4% (95% CI 91.3–99.4%) and 99.3 (95% CI 96.2–99.8%) for IFAT. The use in of the three methods in parallel, combined with bacterial isolation and molecular methods, could improve the diagnosis of the infection in dogs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10536495 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105364952023-09-29 Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis Perletta, Fabrizia Di Pancrazio, Chiara Rodomonti, Diamante Di Febo, Tiziana Luciani, Mirella Krasteva, Ivanka Marinova Maggetti, Marta Profeta, Francesca Salini, Romolo De Massis, Fabrizio Sacchini, Flavio Tittarelli, Manuela Microorganisms Article Canine brucellosis caused by Brucella canis, is an infectious disease affecting dogs and wild Canidae. Clinical diagnosis is challenging, and laboratory testing is crucial for a definitive diagnosis. Various serological methods have been described, but their accuracy is uncertain due to limited validation studies. The present study aimed to evaluate the performances of three serological tests for the diagnosis of B. canis in comparison with bacterial isolation (gold standard), in order to establish a protocol for the serological diagnosis of canine brucellosis. A panel of sera from naturally infected dogs (n = 61), from which B. canis was isolated, and uninfected dogs (n = 143), negative for B. canis isolation, were tested using microplate serum agglutination (mSAT), complement fixation performed using the Brucella ovis antigen (B. ovis-CFT), and a commercial immunofluorescence assay (IFAT). The sensitivity and specificity of the three serological methods were, respectively, the following: 96.7% (95% CI 88.8–98.7%) and 92.3 (95% CI 86.7–95.1%) for mSAT; 96.7% (95% CI 88.8–98.7%) and 96.5 (95% CI 92.1–98.2%) for B. ovis-CFT; 98.4% (95% CI 91.3–99.4%) and 99.3 (95% CI 96.2–99.8%) for IFAT. The use in of the three methods in parallel, combined with bacterial isolation and molecular methods, could improve the diagnosis of the infection in dogs. MDPI 2023-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10536495/ /pubmed/37764006 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11092162 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Perletta, Fabrizia Di Pancrazio, Chiara Rodomonti, Diamante Di Febo, Tiziana Luciani, Mirella Krasteva, Ivanka Marinova Maggetti, Marta Profeta, Francesca Salini, Romolo De Massis, Fabrizio Sacchini, Flavio Tittarelli, Manuela Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title | Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title_full | Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title_short | Evaluation of Three Serological Tests for Diagnosis of Canine Brucellosis |
title_sort | evaluation of three serological tests for diagnosis of canine brucellosis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10536495/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37764006 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11092162 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT perlettafabrizia evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT dipancraziochiara evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT rodomontidiamante evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT difebotiziana evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT lucianimirella evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT krastevaivankamarinova evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT maggettimarta evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT profetafrancesca evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT saliniromolo evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT demassisfabrizio evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT sacchiniflavio evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis AT tittarellimanuela evaluationofthreeserologicaltestsfordiagnosisofcaninebrucellosis |