Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas; Comparative Medicine Program, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas;, Email:
Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2023 Mar 1;62(2):139-146. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000108. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
After detecting and infections and coinfections in 2 litters of puppies in our vivarium, our team realized that we needed a simple, quick, and economical point-of-care test for concurrent screening of asymptomatic dogs for both organisms. Periodic screening of colony dogs and of all dogs introduced into a colony can prevent the spread of and to immunologically naïve animals and help keep staff safe from these zoonotic organisms. To compare methods for diagnosing and spp. in dogs, we used a convenience sampling of feces from 2 popula- tions of dogs; samples were tested with a lateral-flow assay (QC), a commercially-available direct fluorescent assay (DFA), and an inhouse PCR test using established primers. QC results were analyzed in 2 ways: 1) relative to a reference standard that permitted comparative interpretation of DFA and PCR results; and 2) using Bayesian analysis for comparison independent of a reference standard. The QC test showed good specificity for the detection of according to both the reference standard (95%) and the Bayesian analysis (98%). Similarly, specificity of the QC for the detection of was 95% according to the reference standard and 97% according to Bayesian analysis. However, the sensitivity of the QC test was much lower for both (reference standard, 38%; Bayesian analysis, 48%) and (25% and 40%, respectively). This study demonstrates that the QC test can be used to detect both and in dogs and that positive results can be accepted with confidence, whereas negative tests should be confirmed through secondary testing methods.
在我们的动物饲养室中,两窝小狗感染了 和 ,这促使我们的团队意识到,我们需要一种简单、快速且经济的即时检测方法,以便对无症状犬进行这两种病原体的同时筛查。定期对群体犬和进入群体的所有犬进行筛查,可以防止 和 传播给免疫功能尚未成熟的动物,并有助于使工作人员免受这些人畜共患病原体的侵害。为了比较用于诊断犬 的 和 spp. 的方法,我们使用了两种犬群粪便的便利抽样;使用侧向流动检测 (QC)、市售直接荧光检测 (DFA) 和使用既定引物的内部 PCR 检测对样品进行了检测。QC 结果以两种方式进行分析:1) 相对于允许对 DFA 和 PCR 结果进行比较解释的参考标准;2) 使用贝叶斯分析进行独立于参考标准的比较。根据参考标准 (95%) 和贝叶斯分析 (98%),QC 检测对 的检测显示出良好的特异性。同样,根据参考标准和贝叶斯分析,QC 对 的检测特异性分别为 95%和 97%。然而,QC 检测对 和 的敏感性都要低得多(参考标准分别为 38%和 48%,贝叶斯分析分别为 40%和 48%)。本研究表明,QC 检测可用于检测犬体内的 和 ,阳性结果可以被自信地接受,而阴性测试应通过二次检测方法进行确认。