Cargando…
Investigation of canine visceral leishmaniasis in a non-endemic area in Brazil and the comparison of serological and molecular diagnostic tests
INTRODUCTION: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is an important zoonosis in Brazil. Previous identification of parasitized dogs can also help prevent the disease in humans, even in non-endemic areas of the country. The Brazilian Ministry of Health recommends diagnosis in dogs using a DPP(®) (rapid test) a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical - SBMT
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437447/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34495256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0182-2021 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is an important zoonosis in Brazil. Previous identification of parasitized dogs can also help prevent the disease in humans, even in non-endemic areas of the country. The Brazilian Ministry of Health recommends diagnosis in dogs using a DPP(®) (rapid test) as a screening test and an immunoenzymatic assay (ELISA) as a confirmatory test (DPP(®)+ELISA), and culling infected dogs as a legal control measure. However, the accuracy of these serological tests has been questioned. METHODS: VL in dogs was investigated in a non-endemic area of the São Paulo state for three consecutive years, and the performances of different diagnostic tests were compared. RESULTS: A total of 331 dog samples were collected in 2015, 373 in 2016, and 347 in 2017. The seroprevalence by DPP(®)+ELISA was 3.3, 3.2, and 0.3%, respectively, and by indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA), it was 3.0, 5.6, and 5.5%, respectively. ELISA confirmed 18.4% of DPP(®) positive samples. The concordance between the IFA and DPP(®) was 83.9%. The concordance between IFA and DPP(®)+ELISA was 92.9%. A molecular diagnostic test (PCR) was performed in 63.2% of the seropositive samples, all of which were negative. CONCLUSIONS: In non-endemic areas, diagnostic tests in dogs should be carefully evaluated to avoid false results. |
---|