PofoliaPofolia ile paylaşıldı

Parasites & Vectors· 2026Q1

Köpek ve Kedi Kistleri İçin Gastrointestinal Parazit Tespiti: qPCR Paneli Geleneksel Yöntemleri Geride Bıraktı

Comparison of gastrointestinal parasite detection methods in fecal samples from dogs and cats in the United States: qPCR, coproantigen immunoassays, and centrifugal flotation

Pablo David Jimenez Castro, Christian M. Leutenegger, Demitria Vasilatis, Frances M. Moore ve diğerleri

Kısa özet

ABD'deki köpek ve kedilerde yapılan bir çalışmada, qPCR paneli dışkı örneklerinde parazit hedeflerini koproantijen immünoassay'lerden (110/1013 örnek) ve santrifüj flotasyonundan (66/1013 örnek) 2.76 kat daha fazla tespit etti (276/1013 örnek).

Yapay zekâ ile başlık ve abstract'tan üretildi; tam metin okunmaz.

Ana noktalar

  • qPCR, 1013 dışkı örneğinden 276'sında (%27.25) parazit hedefleri tespit etti.
  • Koproantijen immünoassay'leri 1013 örneğin 110'unda (%10.86) hedef tespit etti.
  • Santrifüj flotasyon (O&P) 1013 örneğin 66'sında (%6.52) hedef tespit etti.
  • qPCR, koproantijen ve O&P yöntemlerinin toplamından 3.8 kat daha fazla koinfeksiyon tespit etti.

Yapay zekâ ile başlık ve abstract'tan üretildi; tam metin okunmaz.

Özet (abstract)

Abstract Background Gastrointestinal parasitism is prevalent among domestic dogs and cats in North America and represents a significant cause of clinical disease, particularly in puppies and kittens. The detection and correct identification of parasites in feces currently relies primarily on three different laboratory principles. This field evaluation study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of a qPCR panel in comparison with coproantigens and conventional zinc sulfate centrifugal flotation (O&P) for the detection of gastrointestinal parasites. Methods A convenience set of 1013 fecal samples from dogs and cats were collected in May and June 2025. Each sample from this study was evaluated with three different tests used to diagnose parasitic infections in dogs and cats: qPCR panel, coproantigen tests, and O&P. Each of the three platforms was systematically evaluated against every other platform in a pairwise manner. Each sample was also coded as “parasite detected” or “parasites not detected” for overall parasite detection between the three tests. Results Overall, the qPCR panel, coproantigens, and O&P detected parasitic targets in 276, 110, and 66 samples, respectively. Parasitic targets were detected in 29.62% of samples by the three diagnostic platforms. The qPCR panel detected twice as many parasitic targets than the coproantigens and O&P combined. The qPCR panel detected four times more parasitic targets as the O&P. When comparing the 6 parasitic targets detected by the coproantigen tests to the qPCR tests, qPCR detected 1.6 more parasitic targets. Overall, the 20 qPCR tests detected 3.8 times more parasitic co-infections compared to the coproantigens and O&P tests combined. Conclusions The qPCR panel demonstrated a higher detection rate for parasites when compared to the coproantigen tests and traditional O&P methods irrespective of the parasitic taxa, indicating its utility as a screening method for intestinal parasitism in dogs and cats.

Yazarların özeti; kaynağından alınmıştır. Parasites & Vectors, 2026 · DOI ↗

ÇıkarımlarPremium
Makaleye SorÜcretsiz hesapla

Ücretsiz hesapla devam et

Makaleye Sor ile bu makaleye günde 3 soru ücretsiz; makaleyi kaydet, kaynakçasını al, ilgi alanına göre her gün yeni özetler. Çıkarımlar Premium.

Web'de ücretsiz devam et

Google ya da Apple hesabınla giriş; kart istemez. Bu makaleye geri dönersin.

Telefonda:

ParasitologyImmunology and Microbiology