Journals / Atatürk Üniversitesi Veteriner Bilimleri Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 1

Monocytic Ehrlichiosis in Aegean Region Dogs: Clinical and Haematological Findings

Ege Bölgesindeki Köpeklerde Monositik Ehrlichiosis: Klinik ve Hematolojik Bulgular

Pages
8–14
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Inconclusion, it was suggested that CME was prevalent in our region and CME must be taken into consideration among dogspresenting aforementioned clinical and haematological findings.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The objective of the present study was to evaluate clinical and haematological findings among 63 dogs solelydiagnosed canine monocytic ehrlichiosis (CME) within IFAT application.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Fourteen out of 63 (22.22%) dogs were regularly treated with anti-parasitic drugswhile other 49 dogs (77.77%) were irregularly treated with anti-parasitic drugs.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Inconclusion, it was suggested that CME was prevalent in our region and CME must be taken into consideration among dogspresenting aforementioned clinical and haematological findings.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate clinical and haematological findings among 63 dogs solelydiagnosed canine monocytic ehrlichiosis (CME) within IFAT application. For this purpose; age, breed, sex, anti-parasitic drugapplication, living environment, the presence of tick and general condition of the dogs were noticed, clinical andhaematological variables were determined. Fourteen out of 63 (22.22%) dogs were regularly treated with anti-parasitic drugswhile other 49 dogs (77.77%) were irregularly treated with anti-parasitic drugs. Forty-two (66.66%) of the dogs were livingon garden conditions while 21 (33.33%) of the dogs were living in the house and 36 (57.14%) of the dogs had tick found onclinical referral. The most commonly observed clinical signs were anorexia (87.30%), lymphadenopathy (80.95%), palemucous membranes (47.61%) and fever (42.85 %). Besides tachypnoea (36.50%), tachyarrhythmia (34.92%), haemorrhagia(22.22%), eye lesions (22.22%), skin lesions (7.93%), neurological signs (3.17%) and arthritis (19.04%) were other observedclinical signs. Thrombocytopenia (63.49%) and anaemia (46.03%) were most commonly detected haematological findings. Inconclusion, it was suggested that CME was prevalent in our region and CME must be taken into consideration among dogspresenting aforementioned clinical and haematological findings.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı IFAT uygulaması ile sadece köpek monositik ehrlichiosis (KME) tanısı konulmuş 63 köpekteki klinik ve hematolojik bulguların değerlendirilmesidir. Bu amaçla; yaş, ırk, cinsiyet, anti-paraziter ilaç uygulamaları, yaşadığı ortam, kene varlığı ve genel durumla ilgili bilgiler kaydedilip, klinik ve hematolojik değişkenler belirlendi. Altmış üç köpekten 14’ünde (%22.2) anti-paraziter ilaç uygulamaları düzenliyken, 49 (%77.7) köpekte ise anti-paraziter ilaç uygulamaları düzensizdi. Köpeklerden 42’sinin (%66.6) bahçe ortamında, 21’inin (%33.3) ev ortamında yaşadığı ve 36 köpeğin (%57.1) kliniğe getirildiğinde üzerinde kene olduğu belirlendi. En sık gözlenen klinik bulgular; anoreksi (%87.30), lenfadenopati (%80.95), soluk mukoz membranlar (%47.61) ve ateş olarak tespit edilmiştir (%42.85). Ayrıca, Taşipne (%36.50), taşiaritmi (%34.92), hemoraji (%22.22), göz lezyonu (%22.22), deri lezyonu (%7.93), nörolojik bulgular (%3.17) ve arthritis (%19.04) gözlemlenen diğer klinik bulgular olarak belirlendi. Trombositopeni (%63.49) ve anemi (%46.03) en yaygın belirlenen hematolojik bulgular olarak dikkat çekmiştir. Sonuç olarak bölgemizde KME’in yaygın olarak görüldüğü ve yukarda belirtilen klinik ve hematolojik bulguların birlikte görüldüğü köpeklerde KME’inde dikkate alınması gerektiği kanısına varıldı.

🔖

Cite This Article

TUNA, G. E., BAKIRCI, S., ULUTAŞ, B., KARAGENC, T., DİNLER, C. (2022). Monocytic Ehrlichiosis in Aegean Region Dogs: Clinical and Haematological Findings. Atatürk Üniversitesi Veteriner Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 1, 8–14. https://ajindex.com/articles/455753

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Fonseca JP., Bruhn FRP., Ribeiro MJM., Hirsch C., Rocha CMBM., Guedes E., Antônio Marcos Guimarães AM., 2017. Haematological Parameters and Seroprevalence of Ehrlichia canis and Babesia vogeli in Dogs. Cienc Anim Bras, 18, 1-9
  2. Ansari-Mood M., Khoshnegah J., Mohri M., Rajaei SM., 2015. Seroprevalence and risk factors of Ehrlichia canis infection among companion Dogs of Mashhad, North East of Iran, 2009–2010. J Arthropod Borne Dis, 9, 184-194
  3. Neer TM., Breitschwerdt EB., Greene RT., Lappin MR., 2002. Consensus statement on ehrlichial disease of small animals from the infectious disease study group of the ACVIM. J Vet Intern Med, 16, 309-315
  4. Bhadesiya CM., Raval SK., 2015. Hematobiochemical changes in ehrlichiosis in dogs of Anand region, Gujarat. Vet World, 8, 713- 717
  5. Moonarmart W., Sungpradit S., Rawangchue T., Suphaphiphat K., Suksusieng S., Jirapattharasate C., 2014. Clinical history and haematological findings among canines with monocytic ehrlichiosis. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health, 45, 157-166
  6. M'ghirbi Y., Ghorbel A., Amouri M., Nebaoui A., Haddad S., Bouattour A., 2009. Clinical, serological, and molecular evidence of ehrlichiosis and anaplasmosis in dogs in Tunisia. Parasitol Res, 104, 767-774
  7. Carlos RSA., Carvalho FS., Wenceslau AA., Almosny NRP., Albuquerque GR., 2011. Risk factors and clinical disorders of canine ehrlichiosis in the South of Bahia. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet, 20, 210-214
  8. Karagenç T., Hoşgör M., Bilgiç H., Paşa S., Kırlı G., Eren H., 2005. Ege Bölgesinde köpeklerde E. canis, A. phagocytophila ve A. platys’ in prevalansının nested-PCR ile tespiti. In, Proceedings of the XIV National Parasitology Congress (Ulusal Parazitoloji Kongresi), İzmir, 18-25
  9. Abranches P., Silva-Pereira MC., Conceicao-Silva FM., Santos-Gomes GM., Janz JG., 1991. Canine leishmaniasis: pathological and ecological factors influencing transmission of infection. J Parasitol, 77, 557-561
  10. Kırlı G., 2006. Ege Bölgesi’ndeki köpeklerde Babesiosis’in yaygınlığı. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Türkiye 11. Shkap V., Baneth G., Pipano E., 1994. Circulating antibodies to Hepatozoon canis demonstrated by immunofluorescence. J Vet Diagn Invest, 6, 121- 123
  11. Watanabe M., Okuda M., Tsuji M., Inokuma H., 2004. Seroepidemiological study of canine ehrlichial infections in Yamaguchi prefecture and surrounding areas of Japan. Vet Parasitol, 124, 101-107
  12. Rodriguez-Vivas RI., Albornoz REF., Bolio GME., 20