Skip to main content
PMC home page
Parasites & Vectors logoLink to Parasites & Vectors
. 2012 Nov 13;5:258. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-5-258

Cross-reactions of sera from dogs infected with Angiostrongylus vasorum in commercially available Dirofilaria immitis test kits

Manuela Schnyder 1,✉, Peter Deplazes 1
PMCID: PMC3503614  PMID: 23148786

Abstract

Background

Dirofilaria immitis and Angiostrongylus vasorum are both important potentially fatal canine nematodes with overlapping endemic areas, especially in Europe. The preadult and adult stages of both species are living in the Arteria pulmonalis and the right heart, and diagnostically detectable circulating parasite antigens have been demonstrated for both species. For the detection of D. immitis infections, a variety of commercial tests have been developed, however, they have not been evaluated for cross-reactions against circulating antigens of A. vasorum.

Methods

In this study, potential cross-reactions of sera from 16 dogs, which were experimentally infected with A. vasorum and which had circulating antigens as confirmed by a species-specific ELISA, were evaluated for the detection of A. vasorum antigen in six commercially available D. immitis test kits.

Results

In three fast tests (Witness® Dirofilaria, SensPERT® Canine Heartworm, SNAP® 4Dx® Plus), all sera were negative. One fast membrane ELISA (SNAP® HTWM RT Test) was positive with four sera (25%), and one serum delivered a non-valid result twice. In the PetChek® HTWM PF Test, depending on the interpretation protocol, 5 or 8 dogs (31.2 – 50%) were positive. With the DiroCHEK®-ELISA, a single A. vasorum-infected dog (6.2%) tested positive.

Conclusions

Due to potential cross-reactions with A. vasorum in commercially available test kits for the detection of D. immitis antigen, the simultaneous use of highly specific diagnostic methods for the differentiation of these two canine heart worms is recommended.

Keywords: Angiostrongylus vasorum, Dirofilaria immitis, Antigen detection, Cross-reactions, Dogs

Background

The adult stages of Dirofilaria immitis, a filarial nematode, and Angiostrongylus vasorum, a metastrongylid nematode, are both localized in the Arteria pulmonalis and the right heart of their definitive hosts. Dogs, foxes and some other carnivores are the definitive hosts of both parasites, while Culicidae and Gastropoda are the intermediate hosts of D. immitis and A. vasorum, respectively.

In Europe, D. immitis is present in coastal Mediterranean areas with expansion northwards, while in North America the parasite has expanded from the south-eastern coastal areas northwards and westwards [1] up to Canada [2]. A. vasorum was diagnosed for the first time in France in 1913 [3], but it is only recently that this parasite has regained attention within the veterinary community [4,5]. Its presence has been increasingly reported from several new areas in and outside Europe (reviewed in [6]). Reports of an increasing number of cases of canine angiostrongylosis, as well as the development of new diagnostic tools such as ELISAs [7-10] or biomolecular techniques [11,12] may have contributed and also incentivised epidemiological studies, confirming the presence of this parasite in dogs, foxes and snails throughout Europe. The Atlantic provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador are the only regions actually affected by A. vasorum in North America, with a potential for expansion to further regions [4,13,14]. Overlapping areas in large parts of southern Europe with the presence of both A. vasorum and D. immitis have therefore to be accounted for. Furthermore, in non-endemic areas of D. immitis, this agent has to be considered based on anamnestic information (travelling with pet dogs or imports) and differentiated from A. vasorum infections.

Fatal clinical consequences of D. immitis infection are usually prevented by the monthly use of macrocyclic lactones in known endemic areas [15-17], and treatment of dirofilariosis is based on the intramuscular application of the arsenic derivate melarsomine [18] and/or, alternatively, by eliminating the endosymbiont Wolbachia with doxycycline supported by administration of macrocyclic lactones [19]. Dogs infected with A. vasorum, instead, are treated using macrocyclic lactones such as moxidectin [20] or milbemycin-oxime [13], or applying fenbendazole [21]. Prophylactic treatment (with macrocyclic lactones) against potentially fatal canine angiostrongylosis is, as for dirofilariosis, recommended in highly endemic and well known areas [20].

The currently used diagnostic laboratory methods for the detection of these parasites are divergent. The diagnosis of D. immitis is based on the detection of microfilariae or circulating antigens released by mature adult female worms into the blood circulation, both being detectable starting from 6 months after infection [18]. A variety of tests have been developed for the detection of circulating antigens, employing lateral flow immunochromatographic techniques, membrane ELISAs or conventional ELISAs [22-24]. Test evaluations showed that the sensitivity of heartworm antigen tests depends on the worm burden, and the sex and age of the parasites [24-28], while the specificity of the kits is regularly indicated to be very high, between 95% and 100% [23,25,26,29,30]. However, only occasionally were potential cross-reactions evaluated in animals with natural or experimental infections with other helminths, mainly against other filarial nematodes such as Dipetalonema reconditum[22,31] or Dirofilaria repens, indicating that modern test kits may overcome cross-reactions detected in previously developed test kits for these parasites [32,33], and, rarely, against intestinal parasites such as Ancylostoma caninum and Trichuris spp. [22,34]. The most current diagnostic method for detection of A. vasorum infections in dogs is the isolation of first stage larvae (L1) from faecal samples, which are produced by the parasites approximately 6–7 weeks after infection. Larval migration techniques such as the Baermann-Wetzel method [35] are commonly adopted. Furthermore, ELISAs for the detection of antibodies against A. vasorum have been described [7,9], and, recently, tests for the detection of circulating antigen of A. vasorum have been developed. These latter ones have been evaluated for cross-reactions against Crenosoma vulpis[8,10] and also against intestinal parasites (Toxocara canis, Ancylostoma caninum) and, importantly, against D. immitis[8], showing a high specificity (94-100%).

Due to their common localization within the definitive hosts, their considerable size and particularly the well documented production of circulating antigens [31,36], it was argued that antigens of A. vasorum and D. immitis may share epitopes responsible for potential cross-reactions in antigen detection tests. This hypothesis has been confirmed during the development of the ELISA for the detection of circulating antigen for A. vasorum[8].

The aim of the study was to evaluate potential cross-reactions of sera from dogs experimentally infected with A. vasorum in six different commercially available tests for the detection of D. immitis antigen.

Methods

A total of 16 sera from dogs experimentally inoculated with 200 third stage larvae (L3) of A. vasorum were obtained during previously performed studies [20,37]. Infection of dogs was confirmed by positive Baermann-Wetzel analyses [35], by the detection of circulating A. vasorum antigen [8] and by the presence of adult worms at necropsy adopting an established method of reverse lung perfusion [20]. The day of sample collection (between 55 and 356, mean 101) after inoculation (dpi) and the number of detected parasites at necropsy are shown in Table 1. Worm burdens varied between 10 and 170 adult parasites, with a mean of 66 worms per dog. Dirofilaria immitis infection was excluded based on the fact that the dogs were living in a non-endemic area under controlled experimental conditions, and at necropsy.

Table 1.

Comparative results of 16 sera from dogs experimentally inoculated with Angiostrongylus vasorum (Av) tested with 6 different diagnostic kits for the detection of D. immitis antigen and with an ELISA for detection of A. vasorum circulating antigen[8]

Dog-ID
 Days post inoculation (dpi) Worm burden (n) A. vasorum antigen detection (optical density)1 Diagnostic test kits for the detection of Dirofilaria immitis antigen
  Witness® SensPERT® SNAP® HTWM RT2 SNAP® 4Dx® Plus PetChek® (veterinary practice conditions)3 PetChek® (laboratory conditions)3 DiroCHEK ®
Av 1
 55
 49
 1.484
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 2
 55
 54
 1.825
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 3
 55
 106
 1.743
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 4
 55
 129
 1.400
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 5
 55
 134
 1.485
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 6
 59
 57
 0.567
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 7
 59
 98
 0.657
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 8
 76
 32
 0.263
 neg.
 neg.
 not valid
 neg.
 low pos.
 pos.
 pos.
Av 9
 76
 42
 0.520
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 10
 76
 68
 1.007
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 11
 90
 13
 0.879
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 12
 90
 30
 1.069
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
 neg.
Av 134
 91
 10
 1.264
 neg.
 neg.
 low pos.
 neg.
 low pos.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 144
 91
 170
 1.396
 neg.
 neg.
 low pos.
 neg.
 low pos.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 15
 286
 36
 2.007
 neg.
 neg.
 low pos.
 neg.
 pos.
 pos.
 neg.
Av 16 356 24 1.357 neg. neg. low pos. neg. pos. pos. neg.
Open in a new tab

1: optical density values read at 405 nm.

2: SNAP® HTWM RT test differentiates between low positive (low pos.) and positive results.

3: The interpretation of PetChek® results can be done under an “In-clinic”-protocol based on subjective colour evaluation or under the “Laboratory protocol” by measuring the optical densities at 650 nm and a cut-off calculation based on positive and negative controls.

4: dog Av 13 and Av 14 were inoculated with 50 and 500 L3, respectively.

neg.: negative.

pos.: positive.

All tests were performed blinded with an identity code from 1 to 16, by veterinarians (fast tests) or by experienced laboratory technicians from the IPZ (ELISAs).

All sera were non-haemolytic, stored at −20°C and tested within 11–40 months after collection. The following test kits were used, adopting the manufacturer’s instruction and within the indicated expiry dates:

1) Witness® Dirofilaria, lateral flow (Synbiotics, San Diego, USA)

2) SensPERT® Canine Heartworm, lateral flow (VetAll Laboratories, Kyunggi-Do, South Korea)

3) SNAP® HTWM RT, membrane ELISA (IDEXX Laboratories, Westbrook, USA)

4) SNAP® 4Dx® Plus, membrane ELISA (IDEXX Laboratories, Westbrook, USA)

5) Petchek® HTWM PF Antigen Test , ELISA (IDEXX, Westbrook, USA)

6) DiroCHEK®, ELISA (Synbiotics San Diego, USA)

Results

Single test results are shown in Table 1. All tests, with one exception (see Tab. 1, dog Av 8) fulfilled the criteria for test validity based on the results of positive and/or negative controls.

The ELISA for the detection of circulating A. vasorum antigen was highly positive for all experimentally infected dogs, with absorbance values (optical density read at 405 nm, OD) varying between 0.263 and 2.007 (cut-off value: 0.159, as previously described [8]), with a mean of 1.096.

In three fast tests (Witness®, SensPERT®, SNAP® 4Dx® Plus) all sera resulted negative, while in one fast membrane ELISA (SNAP® HTWM RT) four A. vasorum infected dogs were positive for D. immitis antigen, and one serum delivered a non-valid result twice. In the PetChek®-ELISA two methods for interpretation were adopted: following the instruction for veterinary practitioners based on eye detection, 5 dogs resulted positive for D. immitis infection, while following the instructions under laboratory conditions with OD measurements, a total of 8 dogs were seropositive. With the DiroCHEK®-ELISA, a single A. vasorum infected dog was D. immitis seropositive. With one exception (76 dpi), all cross-reactions were observed in dogs infected with A. vasorum for more than 90 days, with worm burdens varying from 10–170.

Discussion

This study provides evidence of false positive reactions in D. immitis antigen detection kits with sera of dogs infected with A. vasorum. The two ELISAs for D. immitis detection (PetChek® and DiroCHEK®) and the membrane ELISA SNAP® HTWM RT showed single cross-reactions against A. vasorum, which had not been considered so far. In contrast, the adopted ELISA for the detection of circulating A. vasorum antigen has been developed evaluating different monoclonal antibodies, which had been selectively chosen based on their absence of cross-reactivity against D. immitis circulating antigens, resulting in an overall high specificity [8].

Generally, D. immitis antigen tests are considered to be more sensitive than microfilariae concentration methods or other procedures [38]. In particular, the ELISA technology has been shown to be more sensitive than lateral flow immunochromatography [26] for the diagnosis of heartworm infected dogs. Reasons for the occurrence of false negative results with sera of D. immitis – positive dogs have been discussed in previously performed studies evaluating different D. immitis test kits. Low worm burden and low number of female worms have been shown to reduce sensitivity of the tests [25,26,39]. However, increased sensitivity may be coupled with lower specificity and, importantly, with potential cross-reactions against A. vasorum. An unknown number of dogs with travel anamnesis and testing positive for circulating heartworm antigen may have falsely been diagnosed positive due to A. vasorum cross-reactions, and erroneously treated with melarsomine and/or macrocyclic lactones. Therefore, serological results for D. immitis should be confirmed or excluded by additional diagnostic tests (Knott’s test for microfilariae of D. immitis, or serology or Baermann migration test for L1 of A. vasorum) or diagnostic imaging frequently delivering pathognomonic findings for heart dirofilariosis [40,41] or angiostrongylosis [42,43].

Conclusions

In this study we confirmed that sera of dogs infected with A. vasorum cross-react in commercially available test kits for the detection of circulating D. immitis antigen. The simultaneous use of highly specific diagnostic tools is recommended for epidemiological studies where both heart worm species occur or for individual dogs with a suspected heart worm infection.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

MS participated in the design of the study, collected the samples, carried out the diagnostic assays and drafted the manuscript. PD conceived the study and implemented the draft of the manuscript. Both authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Contributor Information

Manuela Schnyder, Email: manuela.schnyder@uzh.ch.

Peter Deplazes, Email: deplazesp@access.uzh.ch.

Acknowledgements

Authors sincerely thank Christine Sperlich and Vera Kaspar for technical assistance, Dr. Jeongmi Kim (VetAll Laboratories, Korea) for the free provision of the test kits and IDEXX Laboratories for providing of SNAP® 4Dx® Plus test kits.

References

  1. Theis JH. Public health aspects of dirofilariasis in the United States. Vet Parasitol. 2005;133(2–3):157–180. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2005.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Villeneuve A, Goring J, Marcotte L, Overvelde S. Seroprevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Ehrlichia canis, and Dirofilaria immitis among dogs in Canada. Can Vet J. 2011;52(5):527–530. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Capdebielle H. Embolie cérébrale produit par Strongylus vasorum. Rev Vét. 1911;36(68):144–147. [Google Scholar]
  4. Conboy GA. Canine angiostrongylosis: the French heartworm: an emerging threat in North America. Vet Parasitol. 2011;176(4):382–389. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.01.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Traversa D, Di Cesare A, Conboy G. Canine and feline cardiopulmonary parasitic nematodes in Europe: emerging and underestimated. Parasit Vectors. 2010;3:62. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-3-62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Koch J, Willesen JL. Canine pulmonary angiostrongylosis: An update. Vet J. 2009;179(3):348–359. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.11.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cury MC, Lima WS, Vitor RWA. Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for the diagnosis of Angiostrongylus vasorum (Baillet, 1866) infection in dogs. Revue Méd Vét. 1996;147(7):525–530. [Google Scholar]
  8. Schnyder M, Tanner I, Webster P, Barutzki D, Deplazes P. An ELISA for sensitive and specific detection of circulating antigen of Angiostrongylus vasorum in serum samples of naturally and experimentally infected dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2011;179:152–158. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.01.054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Schucan A, Schnyder M, Tanner I, Barutzki D, Traversa D, Deplazes P. Detection of specific antibodies in dogs infected with Angiostrongylus vasorum. Vet Parasitol. 2012;185:216–224. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.09.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Verzberger-Epshtein I, Markham RJ, Sheppard JA, Stryhn H, Whitney H, Conboy GA. Serologic detection of Angiostrongylus vasorum infection in dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2008;151(1):53–60. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2007.09.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Al-Sabi MN, Deplazes P, Webster P, Willesen JL, Davidson RK, Kapel CM. PCR detection of Angiostrongylus vasorum in faecal samples of dogs and foxes. Parasitol Res. 2010;107:135–140. doi: 10.1007/s00436-010-1847-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Jefferies R, Morgan ER, Shaw SE. A SYBR green real-time PCR assay for the detection of the nematode Angiostrongylus vasorum in definitive and intermediate hosts. Vet Parasitol. 2009;166(1–2):112–118. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.07.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Conboy G. Natural infections of Crenosoma vulpis and Angiostrongylus vasorum in dogs in Atlantic Canada and their treatment with milbemycin oxime. Vet Rec. 2004;155(1):16–18. doi: 10.1136/vr.155.1.16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Morgan ER, Jefferies R, Krajewski M, Ward P, Shaw SE. Canine pulmonary angiostrongylosis: the influence of climate on parasite distribution. Parasitol Int. 2009;58(4):406–410. doi: 10.1016/j.parint.2009.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Arther RG, Bowman DD, Slone RL, Travis LE. Imidacloprid plus moxidectin topical solution for the prevention of heartworm disease (Dirofiloria immitis) in dogs. Parasitol Res. 2005;97(Suppl 1):S76–S80. doi: 10.1007/s00436-005-1448-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Clemence RG, Sarasola P, Genchi C, Smith DG, Shanks DJ, Jernigan AD, Rowan TG. Efficacy of selamectin in the prevention of adult heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) infection in dogs in northern Italy. Vet Parasitol. 2000;91(3–4):251–258. doi: 10.1016/s0304-4017(00)00296-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Genchi C, Rossi L, Cardini G, Kramer LH, Venco L, Casiraghi M, Genchi M, Agostini A. Full season efficacy of moxidectin microsphere sustained release formulation for the prevention of heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) infection in dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2002;110(1–2):85–91. doi: 10.1016/s0304-4017(02)00325-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. McCall JW, Genchi C, Kramer LH, Guerrero J, Venco L. Heartworm disease in animals and humans. Adv Parasitol. 2008;66:193–285. doi: 10.1016/S0065-308X(08)00204-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Bazzocchi C, Mortarino M, Grandi G, Kramer LH, Genchi C, Bandi C, Genchi M, Sacchi L, McCall JW. Combined ivermectin and doxycycline treatment has microfilaricidal and adulticidal activity against Dirofilaria immitis in experimentally infected dogs. Int J Parasitol. 2008;38(12):1401–1410. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2008.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Schnyder M, Fahrion A, Ossent P, Kohler L, Webster P, Heine J, Deplazes P. Larvicidal effect of imidacloprid/moxidectin spot-on solution in dogs experimentally inoculated with Angiostrongylus vasorum. Vet Parasitol. 2009;166:326–332. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.09.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Willesen JL, Kristensen AT, Jensen AL, Heine J, Koch J. Efficacy and safety of imidacloprid/moxidectin spot-on solution and fenbendazole in the treatment of dogs naturally infected with Angiostrongylus vasorum (Baillet, 1866) Vet Parasitol. 2007;147(3–4):258–264. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2007.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gillis JM, Smith RD, Todd KS Jr. Diagnostic criteria for an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for occult heartworm disease: standardization of the test system in naturally exposed dogs. Am J Vet Res. 1984;45(11):2289–2292. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Atwell RB, Sheridan AB, Baldock FC. An evaluation of the Dirochek test for detection of Dirofilaria immitis antigen in dogs. Austr Vet J. 1988;65(5):161–162. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.1988.tb14451.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee AC, Bowman DD, Lucio-Forster A, Beall MJ, Liotta JL, Dillon R. Evaluation of a new in-clinic method for the detection of canine heartworm antigen. Vet Parasitol. 2011;177(3–4):387–391. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.11.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Atkins CE. Comparison of results of three commercial heartworm antigen test kits in dogs with low heartworm burdens. J Am Vet Med Ass. 2003;222(9):1221–1223. doi: 10.2460/javma.2003.222.1221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Courtney CH, Zeng Q. Comparison of heartworm antigen test kit performance in dogs having low heartworm burdens. Vet Parasitol. 2001;96(4):317–322. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(01)00374-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Martini M, Capelli G, Poglayen G, Bertotti F, Turilli C. The validity of some haematological and ELISA methods for the diagnosis of canine heartworm disease. Vet Res Commun. 1996;20(4):331–339. doi: 10.1007/BF00366539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Rawlings CA, Tonelli Q, Lewis RE, Duncan JR. Semiquantitative test for Dirofilaria immitis as a predictor of thromboembolic complications associated with heartworm treatment in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 1993;54(6):914–919. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Levine SE, Mossler JA, Woodard BH. Dirofilaria immitis: a zoonosis of clinical concern. South Med J. 1980;73(6):749–750. doi: 10.1097/00007611-198006000-00020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Martini M, Poglayen G, Capelli G, Roda R. Diagnosis of canine filariosis: relative sensitivity and specificity of some haematological techniques. Angew Parasitol. 1991;32(3):133–136. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Weil GJ, Malane MS, Powers KG. Detection of circulating parasite antigens in canine dirofilariasis by counterimmunoelectrophoresis. AmJTrop Med Hyg. 1984;33(3):425–430. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1984.33.425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Di Sacco B. Valutazioni comparative e problemi nell'uso di diversi kit diagnostici per la filariosi. Veterinaria. 1993;7(2):20–27. [Google Scholar]
  33. Pantchev N, Etzold M, Daugschies A, Dyachenko V. Diagnosis of imported canine filarial infections in Germany 2008–2010. Parasitol Res. 2011;109(Suppl 1):S61–S76. doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2403-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Brunner CJ, Hendrix CM, Blagburn BL, Hanrahan LA. Comparison of serologic tests for detection of antigen in canine heartworm infections. J Am Vet Med Ass. 1988;192(10):1423–1427. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Eckert J, Friedhoff KT, Zahner H, Deplazes P, editor. Lehrbuch der Parasitologie für die Tiermedizin. 2. Stuttgart: Enke Verlag; 2008. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ehrenberg JP, Tamashiro WK, Scott AL. Dirofilaria immitis: identification and characterization of circulating parasite antigens. Exp Parasitol. 1987;63(2):205–214. doi: 10.1016/0014-4894(87)90163-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Schnyder M, Fahrion A, Riond B, Ossent P, Webster P, Kranjc A, Glaus T, Deplazes P. Clinical, laboratory and pathological findings in dogs experimentally infected with Angiostrongylus vasorum. Parasitol Res. 2010;107:1471–1480. doi: 10.1007/s00436-010-2021-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Vezzani D, Fontanarrosa MF, Eiras DF. Are antigen test kits efficient for detecting heartworm-infected dogs at the southern distribution limit of the parasite in South America? Preliminary results. Res Vet Sci. 2008;85(1):113–115. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2007.08.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Klotins KC, Martin SW, Bonnett BN, Peregrine AS. Canine heartworm testing in Canada: are we being effective? Can Vet J. 2000;41(12):929–937. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Lonsky JM, Thrall DE, Lewis RE. Thoracic radiographic abnormalities in 200 dogs with heartworm-induced cor pulmonale. Vet Radiol. 1983;24:120–123. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.1983.tb01550.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Badertscher RR, Losonsky JM, Paul AJ, Kneller SK. Two-dimensional echocardiography for diagnosis of dirofilariasis in nine dogs. J Am Vet Med Ass. 1988;193(7):843–846. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Dennler M, Makara M, Kranjc A, Schnyder M, Ossent P, Deplazes P, Ohlerth S, Glaus TM. Thoracic computed tomography findings in dogs experimentally infected with Angiostrongylus vasorum. Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2011;52(3):289–294. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2010.01776.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Kranjc A, Schnyder M, Dennler M, Fahrion A, Makara M, Ossent P, Morgan J, Deplazes P, Glaus TM. Pulmonary artery thrombosis in experimental Angiostrongylus vasorum infection does not result in pulmonary hypertension and echocardiographic right ventricular changes. J Vet Int Med. 2010;24:855–862. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2010.0529.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Parasites & Vectors are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES