Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T17:58:01.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative methodology for the detection and differentiation of circulating microfilariae of Dirofilaria immitis in the dog

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2024

M.E. Mylonakis ,
E. Papadopoulos ,
A.F. Koutinas ,
C. Paitaki  and
L. Leontides
M.E. Mylonakis
Affiliation:
Clinic of Companion Animal Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 11 Stavrou Voutyra str., GR-54627, Thessaloniki, Greece
E. Papadopoulos
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, School of Veterinary Medicine, University Campus, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, GR-54124, Thessaloniki, Greece
A.F. Koutinas*
Affiliation:
Clinic of Companion Animal Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 11 Stavrou Voutyra str., GR-54627, Thessaloniki, Greece
C. Paitaki
Affiliation:
Clinic of Companion Animal Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 11 Stavrou Voutyra str., GR-54627, Thessaloniki, Greece
L. Leontides
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Epidemiology and Animal Production Economics, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Thessaly, Terma Trikalon, GR-43100, Karditsa, Greece
*
*Author for correspondence PO Box 16039, 54401 Thessaloniki, Greece Fax: +30 2310 994516 Email: sanimed@vet.auth.gr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The sensitivities of the Knott's test (four 20-μl sediment aliquots), quantitative buffy coat capillary tube method (QBC tube, 111 μl of whole blood) and direct blood smear (DBS, 20 μl of whole blood) were evaluated for the detection of microfilaraemia in dogs. Undiluted whole blood samples taken from 70 Dirofilaria immitis antigen-positive dogs and 10 serially diluted microfilaraemic blood samples at concentrations of 400, 200, 100, 50, 25 and 12 microfilariae (mff) ml−1 were examined. For filarial speciation, the buffy coat of QBC tubes was mixed with one drop of methylene blue–formalin solution and examined as a direct smear. In 52/70 microfilaraemic blood samples, the number of mff ranged from 12 to 321987 ml−1 (median: 3199 ml−1). The diagnostic sensitivity of the Knott's test, QBC tube method and DBS in undiluted blood samples attained the 100%, 98% and 92.3% levels, respectively. Eighteen dogs tested amicrofilaraemic by all three methods. At concentrations of 400 mff ml−1, a 100% sensitivity was found by all three methods, while at 200 mff ml−1 the Knott's test, QBC tube and DBS were 100%, 100% and 90% sensitive, respectively. The relevant figures at 100 mff ml−1 were 100%, 100% and 80%, at 50 mff ml−1 100%, 100% and 50%, at 25 mff ml−1 100%, 100% and 10% and at 12 mff ml−1 80%, 50% and 10%. At 50 and 25 mff ml−1, the DBS was less sensitive compared to the other two methods, while at 12 mff ml−1, only to the Knott's test. A significant correlation was found between the QBC tube method and Knott's test regarding mff speciation. Therefore, the QBC method may be considered a reliable alternative to the Knott's test for both the detection and speciation of mff in the dog.

Type
Review Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 137 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown, S.A. Barsanti, J.A. (1988) Quantitative buffy coat analysis for hematologic measurements of canine, feline, and equine blood samples and for detection of microfilaraemia in dogs. American Journal of Veterinary Research 49: 321–324.Google Scholar
Courtney, C.H. Zeng, Q. (2001) Relationship between microfilaria count and sensitivity of the direct smear for diagnosis of canine dirofilariosis. Veterinary Parasitology 94: 199–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dillon, R. (2000) Dirofilariasis in dogs and cats. pp. 937–963 in Ettinger, S.J. & Feldman, E.C. (Eds) Textbook of veterinary internal medicine. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
Freedman, B. Berry, R.S. (1992) Rapid diagnosis of bancroftian filariasis by acridine orange staining of centrifuged parasites. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 47: 787–793.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gringoli, G., Rinaldi, L., Veneziano, V. Capelli, G. (2001) A prevalence survey and risk analysis of filariosis in dogs from the Mt. Vesuvius area of southern Italy . Veterinary Parasitology 102: 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J.D. (1973) Detection and differentiation of canine microfilariae. Australian Veterinary Journal 49: 23–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, D.H. (1998) 1999 Guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention, and management of heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) infection in dogs. pp. 257–264 in Seward, R.L. (Ed.) Recent advances in heartworm disease: symposium ’98. Batavia, Illinois, American Heartworm Society.Google Scholar
Levine, R.A., Hart, A.H. Wardlaw, S.G. (1986) Quantitative buffy coat analysis of blood collected from dogs, cats and horses. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 189: 670–673.Google ScholarPubMed
Lindsey, J.R. (1965) Identification of canine microfilariae. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 146: 1106–1114.Google ScholarPubMed
Long, G.W., Rickman, L.S. Cross, J.H. (1990) Rapid diagnosis of Brugia malayi and Wuchereria bancrofti filariasis by an acridine orange microhematocrit tube technique. Journal of Parasitology 76: 278–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palumbo, N.W., Desowitz, R.S. Perri, S.F. (1981) Observations on the adverse reaction to diethylcarbamazine in Dirofilaria immitis -infected dogs. Tropenmedizin und Parasitologie 32: 115–118.Google ScholarPubMed
Papazahariadou, M.G., Koutinas, A.F., Rallis, T.S. Haralabidis, S.T. (1994) Prevalence of microfilaraemia in episodic weakness and clinically normal dogs belonging to hunting breeds. Journal of Helminthology 68: 243–245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rawlings, C.A. (1986) Diagnosis of infection. pp. 209–229 in Pedersen, D. (Ed.) Heartworm disease in dogs and cats. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
Wang, L. (1998) Evaluation of quantitative buffy coat analysis in the detection of canine Dirofilaria immitis infection: a model to determine its effectiveness in the diagnosis of human filariasis. Parasitology Research 84: 246–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, A.D.G., Testoni, F.G. Porges, W.L. (1973) A comparison of microfilariae isolated from canine blood by the modified Knott's test and a filter method. Australian Veterinary Journal 49: 28–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, J.P. (1970) Detection of microfilariae by a filter technique. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 156: 1403–1405.Google ScholarPubMed