Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Jul;12(7):595-604.
doi: 10.1089/vbz.2011.0915. Epub 2012 May 18.

Seroprevalence and geographic distribution of Dirofilaria immitis and tick-borne infections (Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, and Ehrlichia canis) in dogs from Romania

Affiliations

Seroprevalence and geographic distribution of Dirofilaria immitis and tick-borne infections (Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, and Ehrlichia canis) in dogs from Romania

Viorica Mircean et al. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2012 Jul.

Abstract

Tick-borne diseases are of great concern worldwide. Despite this, in Romania there is only limited information regarding the prevalence of vector-borne pathogens in dogs. In all, 1146 serum samples were tested by SNAP(®) 4Dx(®) (IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., Westbrook, ME) for Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi, and Ehrlichia canis antibodies, and for Dirofilaria immitis antigen. The correlation between positive cases and their geographic distribution, as well as potential risk factors (age, sex, breed, type of dog, habitat, and prophylactic treatments) were evaluated. Overall, 129 dogs (11.3%) were serologically-positive to one or more of the tested pathogens. The seroprevalence for the four infectious agents were: A. phagocytophilum 5.5% (63/1146), D. immitis 3.3% (38/1146), E. canis 2.1% (24/1146), and B. burgdorferi 0.5% (6/1146). Co-infection with E. canis and A. phagocytophilum was registered in 2 dogs (0.2%). The geographical distribution of the seropositive cases suggests clustered foci in southern regions and in the western part of the country for D. immitis, and in the southeastern region (Constanţa County) for E. canis. A. phagocytophilum and B. burgdorferi showed a homogenous distribution, with a tendency for Lyme-positive samples to concentrate in central Romania. For D. immitis, A. phagocytophilum, and E. canis, administering prophylactic treatments was a risk factor associated with infection. Another associated risk factor was the type of dog (stray dogs were at risk being positive for D. immitis, shelter dogs for E. canis, and hunting dogs for B. burgdorferi). The prevalence of D. immitis was significantly higher in males and in dogs older than 2 years. This survey represents the first data detailing A. phagocytophilum and E. canis seroprevalence in Romanian dogs, and the most comprehensive epidemiological study on vector-borne infections in dogs from this country.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources