English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this study, three different diagnostic tests for parvovirus were compared with vaccination status and parvovirus genotype in suspected canine parvovirus cases. Faecal samples from vaccinated (N17) and unvaccinated or unknown vaccination status (N41) dogs that had clinical signs of parvovirus infection were tested using three different assays of antigen tests, conventional and quantitative PCR tests. The genotype of each sample was determined by sequencing. In addition to the suspected parvovirus samples, 21 faecal samples from apparently healthy dogs were tested in three diagnostic tests to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the tests. The antigen test was positive in 41.2% of vaccinated dogs and 73.2% of unvaccinated diseased dogs. Conventional PCR and qPCR were positive for canine parvovirus (CPV) in 82.4% of vaccinated dogs and 92.7% of unvaccinated dogs. CPV type-2c (CPV-2c) was detected in 82.75% of dogs (12 vaccinated and 36 unvaccinated dogs), CPV-2b was detected in 5.17% dogs (one vaccinated and two unvaccinated) and CPV-2a in 1.72% vaccinated dog. Mean Ct values in qPCR for vaccinated dogs were higher than the unvaccinated dogs ( p = 0.049), suggesting that vaccinated dogs shed less virus, even in clinical forms of CPV. CPV-2c was the dominant subtype infecting dogs in both vaccinated and unvaccinated cases. Faecal antigen testing failed to identify a substantial proportion of CPV-2c infected dogs, likely due to low sensitivity. The faecal samples from apparently healthy dogs ( n = 21) showed negative results in all three tests. Negative CPV faecal antigen results should be viewed with caution until they are confirmed by molecular methods.

Diagnostic Challenges in Canine Parvovirus 2c in Vaccine Failure Cases