Cargando…

Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings

Flea infestation is diagnosed after the detection of either adult parasites or flea faeces in the fur. The latter is generally tested with the wet blotting paper technique (WBPT). However, microscopical examination (MT) of the coat brushing material is sometimes suggested as an alternative. This stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cadiergues, Marie-Christine, Cabaret-Mandin, Caroline, Solatges, Chloé
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4227412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25405217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/292085
_version_ 1782343800758206464
author Cadiergues, Marie-Christine
Cabaret-Mandin, Caroline
Solatges, Chloé
author_facet Cadiergues, Marie-Christine
Cabaret-Mandin, Caroline
Solatges, Chloé
author_sort Cadiergues, Marie-Christine
collection PubMed
description Flea infestation is diagnosed after the detection of either adult parasites or flea faeces in the fur. The latter is generally tested with the wet blotting paper technique (WBPT). However, microscopical examination (MT) of the coat brushing material is sometimes suggested as an alternative. This study aimed to compare the efficiency of the two techniques. In dogs, the entire body was hand-brushed and cats were combed. One half of the collected material was mounted in liquid paraffin on a glass slide and examined microscopically at low magnification. The second half was placed on a blotting paper and sterile water was added. After drying, reddish aureoles were counted. 255 animals (158 dogs and 97 cats) were included. 119 (47%) and 94 (37%) samples were revealed to be positive with WBPT and MT, respectively. 13 cases (5%) were positive with MT only and 38 cases (15%) were positive with WBPT only. 81 cases (32%) were positive and 123 (48%) were negative with both techniques. More positive cases were detected by WBPT than MT (P < 0.001). Amongst the 51 samples which were found positive with a sole technique, infestation was considered low in 43 cases and WBPT detected significantly more positive samples (31) than MT (12), P < 0.01.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4227412
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42274122014-11-17 Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings Cadiergues, Marie-Christine Cabaret-Mandin, Caroline Solatges, Chloé ScientificWorldJournal Research Article Flea infestation is diagnosed after the detection of either adult parasites or flea faeces in the fur. The latter is generally tested with the wet blotting paper technique (WBPT). However, microscopical examination (MT) of the coat brushing material is sometimes suggested as an alternative. This study aimed to compare the efficiency of the two techniques. In dogs, the entire body was hand-brushed and cats were combed. One half of the collected material was mounted in liquid paraffin on a glass slide and examined microscopically at low magnification. The second half was placed on a blotting paper and sterile water was added. After drying, reddish aureoles were counted. 255 animals (158 dogs and 97 cats) were included. 119 (47%) and 94 (37%) samples were revealed to be positive with WBPT and MT, respectively. 13 cases (5%) were positive with MT only and 38 cases (15%) were positive with WBPT only. 81 cases (32%) were positive and 123 (48%) were negative with both techniques. More positive cases were detected by WBPT than MT (P < 0.001). Amongst the 51 samples which were found positive with a sole technique, infestation was considered low in 43 cases and WBPT detected significantly more positive samples (31) than MT (12), P < 0.01. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2014 2014-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4227412/ /pubmed/25405217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/292085 Text en Copyright © 2014 Marie-Christine Cadiergues et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cadiergues, Marie-Christine
Cabaret-Mandin, Caroline
Solatges, Chloé
Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title_full Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title_fullStr Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title_short Comparison of Two Techniques for the Detection of Flea Faeces in Canine and Feline Coat Brushings
title_sort comparison of two techniques for the detection of flea faeces in canine and feline coat brushings
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4227412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25405217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/292085
work_keys_str_mv AT cadierguesmariechristine comparisonoftwotechniquesforthedetectionoffleafaecesincanineandfelinecoatbrushings
AT cabaretmandincaroline comparisonoftwotechniquesforthedetectionoffleafaecesincanineandfelinecoatbrushings
AT solatgeschloe comparisonoftwotechniquesforthedetectionoffleafaecesincanineandfelinecoatbrushings