Retrospective analysis of feline intestinal parasites: trends in testing positivity by age, USA geographical region and reason for veterinary visit.
Ascarid
Cat
Coproantigen
Fecal
Feline
Flotation
Giardia
Hookworm
Parasitism
Whipworm
Journal
Parasites & vectors
ISSN: 1756-3305
Titre abrégé: Parasit Vectors
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101462774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Sep 2020
15 Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
20
05
2020
accepted:
26
08
2020
entrez:
16
9
2020
pubmed:
17
9
2020
medline:
11
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The goals of this retrospective study were to estimate parasite positivity in samples from cats using zinc sulfate fecal flotation by centrifugation ("centrifugation") and coproantigen and examine trends with age, geographical region and reason for visit to veterinarian. Common methods of parasite detection, such as centrifugal flotation, passive flotation, or direct smear, may underrepresent the true prevalence of intestinal parasites in cats. Coproantigen testing detects more positive samples than traditional methods alone. Feline fecal test results from the continental USA containing results for fecal exams performed using centrifugation paired with coproantigen results for ascarid, hookworm, whipworm and Giardia were obtained from the database of a national commercial reference laboratory comprised of multiple regional sites. Parasite positivity was highest in samples from young cats and decreased with cat age. The western region of the USA had lower total parasite positivity than other regions for all parasites except Giardia. Cats receiving fecal tests during veterinary wellness visits had only slightly lower parasite positivity than samples from cats during sick clinical visits. This study showed a larger population of cats are at increased risk of parasitism than commonly believed and coproantigen testing produces more positive test results for the four parasites that antigen can detect than centrifugation of feline fecal samples.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The goals of this retrospective study were to estimate parasite positivity in samples from cats using zinc sulfate fecal flotation by centrifugation ("centrifugation") and coproantigen and examine trends with age, geographical region and reason for visit to veterinarian. Common methods of parasite detection, such as centrifugal flotation, passive flotation, or direct smear, may underrepresent the true prevalence of intestinal parasites in cats. Coproantigen testing detects more positive samples than traditional methods alone.
METHODS
METHODS
Feline fecal test results from the continental USA containing results for fecal exams performed using centrifugation paired with coproantigen results for ascarid, hookworm, whipworm and Giardia were obtained from the database of a national commercial reference laboratory comprised of multiple regional sites.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Parasite positivity was highest in samples from young cats and decreased with cat age. The western region of the USA had lower total parasite positivity than other regions for all parasites except Giardia. Cats receiving fecal tests during veterinary wellness visits had only slightly lower parasite positivity than samples from cats during sick clinical visits.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a larger population of cats are at increased risk of parasitism than commonly believed and coproantigen testing produces more positive test results for the four parasites that antigen can detect than centrifugation of feline fecal samples.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32933564
doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04319-4
pii: 10.1186/s13071-020-04319-4
pmc: PMC7493338
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
473Références
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1978 Mar 1;172(5):564-7
pubmed: 632193
Zoonoses Public Health. 2018 Jun;65(4):412-419
pubmed: 29423934
Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2018 Dec;14:181-186
pubmed: 31014727
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2017 Sep;29(5):645-653
pubmed: 28424002
Vet Ther. 2006 Spring;7(1):4-14
pubmed: 16598679
Trends Parasitol. 2010 Apr;26(4):155-61
pubmed: 20172762
Vet Parasitol. 2009 Dec 3;166(1-2):153-8
pubmed: 19709815
Vet Parasitol. 2017 Nov 30;247:108-112
pubmed: 29080756
Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2018 Dec;14:50-53
pubmed: 31014736
Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2016 Sep;5:1-13
pubmed: 31014530
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 Mar 15;228(6):885-92
pubmed: 16536699
Parasit Vectors. 2018 Nov 1;11(1):571
pubmed: 30382932
Vet Parasitol. 1988 Dec;30(2):113-24
pubmed: 3245104
Vet Parasitol. 1995 Sep;59(2):87-96
pubmed: 7483240
Top Companion Anim Med. 2019 Jun;35:42-46
pubmed: 31122687
Vet Parasitol. 2003 Jul 10;115(1):19-24
pubmed: 12860064
J Vet Intern Med. 2010 Mar-Apr;24(2):293-7
pubmed: 20136713
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000 Mar 1;216(5):687-92
pubmed: 10707683
Vet Ther. 2005 Spring;6(1):15-28
pubmed: 15906267
J Feline Med Surg. 2011 Apr;13(4):300-3
pubmed: 21334238
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2014 Mar 26;26(3):404-411
pubmed: 24670954