Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Veterinary World logoLink to Veterinary World
. 2018 Jan 23;11(1):58–65. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2018.58-65

Zoonotic intestinal parasites of carnivores: A systematic review in Iran

Shahabeddin Sarvi 1, Ahmad Daryani 1, Mehdi Sharif 1, Mohammad Taghi Rahimi 2, Mohammad Hasan Kohansal 3, Siavash Mirshafiee 4, Abolghasem Siyadatpanah 5, Seyed-Abdollah Hosseini 5, Shirzad Gholami 1,✉
PMCID: PMC5813513  PMID: 29479158

Abstract

Aim:

Parasitic infections, especially of the zoonotic-parasitic type, are the most important health, economic, and social problems in developing countries, including Iran. The aim of this study was to review systematically the available data on gastrointestinal parasites of carnivores in Iran and their ability to infect humans.

Materials and Methods:

Studies reporting intestinal parasites of carnivores were systematically collected from nine electronic English and Persian databases and Proceedings of Iranian parasitology and veterinary congresses published between 1997 and 2015. A total of 26 studies issued from 1997 to 2015 met the eligibility criteria.

Results:

The pooled proportion of intestinal parasites of carnivores was estimated as 80.4% (95% confidence interval=70.2-88.8%). The overall prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites in dogs, cats, foxes, and jackals were 57.89%, 90.62%, 89.17%, and 97.32%, respectively. Dipylidium caninum (20.45%), Toxocara spp. (18.81%), Taenia hydatigena (15.28%), Mesocestoides lineatus (11.83%), Echinococcus granulosus (10%), and Toxascaris leonina (8.69%) were the most frequently observed parasites.

Conclusion:

High prevalence rates of zoonotic intestinal parasites of carnivores particularly Echinococcus spp. and Toxocara spp. increase the risk of acquiring zoonotic infections such as cystic hydatid, alveolar cysts, and visceral or ocular larva migrants in Iranian people. Therefore, it is essential for public health centers to develop more effective control strategies to decrease infections rates in carnivores’ populations.

Keywords: carnivores, intestinal parasites, zoonotic disease

Introduction

Parasitic infections, particularly those capable of zoonosis, are the most important health, economic, and social problems in developing countries, including Iran. Carnivores are definitive or reservoirs hosts for more than 60 zoonotic parasites [1,2]. The presence of these animals in close contact with people constitutes a high potential risk of infection, especially for children due to their poor hygiene relative to adults and higher exposure to contact with contaminated soil containing parasite eggs or cysts. Further, farmers and ranchers who often work in agriculture and animal husbandry are at risk [1,3]. Several gastrointestinal parasites of canines particularly Toxocara spp., Ancylostoma spp., Echinococcus spp., Dipylidium spp., Giardia, and Cryptosporidium spp. are considered important in the public health area by the zoonotic potential that they present [4,5].

Zoonotic parasites that are transmitted to humans can be divided into four groups: (i) Direct zoonotic parasites that infect humans directly from animals including: Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and Toxocara, (ii) saprozoonotic parasites that are transmitted through soil or water, for example, Ancylostoma spp. and Strongyloides stercoralis, (iii) meta-zoonotic parasites that humans acquire through invertebrate intermediate hosts including Fasciola spp. and Dipylidium caninum, and (iv) cyclo-zoonotic parasites that can infect humans through vertebrate intermediate hosts such as Echinococcus granulosus and Taenia spp. [5-8].

Infections with some of the aforementioned parasites cause symptoms and clinical manifestations in humans including hydatidosis, visceral larva migrans, coenurosis, creeping eruption, mesocestoidiasis, and dipylidiasis [1,9]. Among the above-mentioned zoonotic-parasitic infections, Iran is considered an important endemic area of hydatidosis. In addition, toxocariasis is a zoonotic disease with a documented high prevalence in this country [10]. Although numerous studies have been conducted in relation to the prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites in carnivores in Iran, there is no systematic review to analyze this data. Therefore, the major objective of the current systematic review was to determine the prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites in carnivores, and further, to describe the epidemiological status of zoonotic parasitic infections of carnivores in Iran.

Materials and Methods

Database search

Five English databases (PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (ISI), and Google Scholar) and four Persian databases (Magiran, Scientific Information Database, Iran Medex, and Iran Doc) were searched for published articles about intestinal parasites of carnivores in Iran from 1997 to 2015. The language of data collection was limited to English and Persian. The keywords used alone or in combination were: “Intestinal parasite,” “zoonotic parasites,” “carnivores,” “dogs,” “cats,” “foxes,” “jackals,” “prevalence,” “helminth,” “protozoa,” and “Iran.” All Iranian parasitology and veterinary congresses proceedings were carefully evaluated. To avoid missing any papers, all references from each article were systematically checked (Figure-1).

Figure-1.

Figure-1

Open in a new tab

Flow diagram describing the study design process.

Data extractions

Extracted data from the studies included information about the year of publication, first author, province of the study, diagnostic method, sample size, number of positive samples, types of carnivorous, types of gastrointestinal parasites, and types of animal (domestic or stray). In addition, studies which were attributed to human, tissue, blood parasite, case report, and repetitive papers have been excluded.

Statistical analysis

The pooled proportion of carnivore intestinal parasitic infection, as well as, 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for each study. A forest plot was used to visualize heterogeneity among the included studies. The size of every square indicated the weight of every study also the crossed lines illustrated CI. The heterogeneity was expected in advance, and statistical analyses including I2 and Cochrane’s Q test (with a significance level of p<0.1) were used to quantify variations. The StatsDirect statistical software (http://www.statsdirect.com) was used for analysis.

Results

A total of 26 studies in Iran, reporting for carnivorous intestinal parasites, fulfilled our inclusion criteria (Table-1) [11-34]. A total of 2,508 samples were analyzed, and the pooled proportion of carnivore intestinal parasites, in Iran, from 1997 to 2015 was estimated at 80.4% using a random effect model (95% CI=70.2-88.8%) and a forest plot diagram of the study was generated (Figure-2). A wide variation of these parasites was observed in the included studies (Q statistic=1107, degree of freedom (df)=31, p<0.0001, and I²=97.2%). The overall prevalence of gastrointestinal parasite in dogs, cats, foxes, and jackals was 57.89%, 90.62%, 89.17%, and 97.32%, respectively (Table-2).

Table 1.

Details of the included studies of intestinal parasitic infections in carnivores in Iran.

ID Province of Iran Animal Domestic/Stray Diagnostic method Sample size Parasite positive samples Prevalence (%) Ref
1 Isfahan Dog Stray Parasitologic 61 31 50.81 [11]
2 Mazandaran Jackals Stray Parasitologic 45 42 93.33 [12]
Dog Stray Parasitologic 30 24 80
3 Kerman Dog Stray Parasitologic 22 14 63.63 [13]
4 Isfahan Cat Stray Parasitologic 113 109 96.46 [14]
5 Mazandaran Cat Stray Parasitologic 100 78 78 [15]
6 Western Azerbaijan/Kurdistan/Kermanshah Jackals Stray Parasitologic 10 10 100 [3]
Fox Stray Parasitologic 22 21 95.45
Dog Stray Parasitologic 83 74 89.15
7 Fars Cat Stray Parasitologic 114 106 92.98 [16]
8 Isfahan Cat Stray Parasitologic 113 110 97.34 [10]
9 Ardabil Jackals Stray Parasitologic 1 1 100 [17]
Fox Stray Parasitologic 89 82 92.13
Dog Domestic Parasitologic 59 39 66.1
10 Semnan Dog Stray Parasitologic 50 40 80 [18]
11 Western Azerbaijan Dog Stray Parasitologic 206 71 34.46 [19]
12 Razavi Khorasan Cat Stray Parasitologic 52 46 88.46 [20]
13 Eastern Azerbaijan Fox Stray Parasitologic 52 41 78.84 [21]
14 Eastern Azerbaijan Dog ND Parasitologic 100 41 41 [22]
15 Mazandaran Dog Stray Parasitologic 50 45 90 [23]
16 Isfahan Dog Stray Parasitologic 96 58 60.4 [24]
17 Razavi Khorasan Dog Stray Parasitologic 100 86 86 [25]
18 Ilam Dog Stray Parasitologic 65 54 83.07 [26]
19 Razavi Khorasan Dog Stray Parasitologic 100 84 84 [27]
20 Razavi Khorasan Dog Stray/Domestic Parasitologic and PCR 77 51 66.23 [28]
21 Ilam Jackals Stray Microscopic 56 56 100 [29]
Fox Stray Parasitologic 62 62 100
22 Khuzestan Cat Stray Parasitologic 140 121 86.42 [30]
23 Lorestan Dog Stray Parasitologic 80 68 85 [31]
24 Mazandaran Dog Stray Parasitologic and PCR 100 57 57 [32]
25 Hamedan Dog Stray Parasitologic 210 14 6.66 [33]
26 Ilam Cat Stray Parasitologic 50 48 96 [34]
Open in a new tab

ID=Identification number, Ref=Reference, PCR=Polymerase chain reaction

Figure-2.

Figure-2

Open in a new tab

Forest plot diagram of intestinal parasitic infections in carnivores in Iran.

Table 2.

Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasitic infections in different species of carnivores in Iran.

Carnivores Status of gastrointestinal parasites
N (%)
Uninfected Infected Total
Dog 648 (42.11) 891 (57.89) 1539 (100)
Cat 64 (9.38) 618 (90.62) 682 (100)
Fox 30 (10.83) 247 (89.17) 277 (100)
Jackal 3 (2.68) 109 (97.32) 112 (100)
Open in a new tab

N=Number of samples

The most frequently observed parasite in carnivores was D. caninum (20.45%), followed by Toxocara spp. (18.81%), Taenia hydatigena (15.28%), Mesocestoides lineatus (11.83%), Diplopylidium nolleri (10.7%), E. granulosus (10%), Joyeuxiella (9.65%), Ancylostoma caninum (8.77%), Toxascaris leonina (8.69%), Rictolaria efinis (6.66%), Physaloptera spp. (6.5%), Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus (3.1%), Taenia taeniaeformis (2.75%), Uncinaria stenocephala (2.6%), Sarcocystis spp. (1.8%), Eimeria spp. (1.4%), and Trichuris vulpis (0.57%).

By host species, T. hydatigena was the most common parasite (23.91%) in dogs, Joyeuxiella (35.04%) in cats, and M. lineatus (51.98%) in foxes and (39.28%) jackals (Table-3).

Table 3.

Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasitic infections among foxes, dogs, cats, and jackals in Iran.

Parasite species N (%)
Dogs (n=1539) Cats (n=682) Foxes (n=277) Jackals (n=112) Total (n=2610)
Dipylidium caninum 260 (16.89) 234 (34.31) 14 (5.05) 26 (23.21) 534 (20.45)
Mesocestoides lineatus 99 (6.4) 22 (3.81) 144 (51.98) 44 (39.28) 309 (11.83)
Toxascaris leonina 160 (10.39) 10 (1.46) 54 (19.49) 3 (2.67) 227 (8.69)
Toxocara spp. 190 (12.34) 179 (26.24) 97 (35.01) 25 (22.32) 491 (18.81)
Ancylostoma caninum 97 (6.3) 69 (6.14) 31 (11.19) 32 (28.57) 229 (8.77)
Taenia hydatigena 368 (23.91) 2 (0.29) 24 (8.66) 5 (4.46) 399 (15.28)
Echinococcus granulosus 225 (14.61) - 5 (1.8) 12 (10.71) 242 (16)
Taenia ovis 54 (3.5) - ND (ND) ND (ND) 54 (2.8)
Taenia taeniaeformis 6 (0.38) 47 (6.89) - 19 (16.96) 72 (2.75)
Taenia multiceps 74 (4.8) - ND (ND) 1 (0.89) 75 (3.89)
Uncinaria stenocephala 18 (1.16) ND (ND) 17 (6.13) 33 (29.46) 68 (2.6)
Joyeuxiella 4 (0.25) 239 (35.04) 6 (2.16) 3 (2.67) 252 (9.65)
Trichuris vulpis 6 (0.38) - 5 (1.8) ND (ND) 11 (0.57)
Richtolaria efinis 21 (1.36) - 83 (29.96) 70 (62.5) 174 (6.66)
Physaloptera 2 (0.13) 147 (21.55) - 21 (7.58) 170 (6.5)
Diplopylidium nolleri - 73 (10.7) - - 73 (10.7)
Isospora spp. 5 (0.32) 75 (10.99) ND (ND) 4 (3.57) 84 (3.21)
Sarcocystis 13 (0.84) 35 (5.13) ND (ND) ND (ND) 48 (1.83)
Eimeria 15 (0.97) 21 (3.07) 3 ND ND (ND) 39 (1.49)
Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus 6 (0.39) ND (ND) 69 (24.9) 6 (5.35) 81 (3.1)
Open in a new tab

ND=Not detected

According to the study areas, West Azerbaijan/Kurdistan/Kermanshah (89.15%), Isfahan (97.34%) and Ilam (100%) provinces had the highest rate of intestinal parasitic infections in dogs, cats, and foxes (Table-4) [3,13-34]. Moreover, the prevalence of these parasites in jackals in most provinces was 100%.

Table 4.

Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasitic infections by areas among dogs, cats, foxes, and jackals in Iran.

Province Dog Cat Foxe Jackal References
No. Pos. (%) No. Pos. (%) No. Pos. (%) No. Pos. (%)
Ardabil 59 39 (66.1) - - 89 82 (92.13) 1 1 (100) [17]
Eastern Azerbaijan 100 41 (41) - - 52 41 (78.84) - - [21,22]
Fars - - 114 106 (92.98) - - - - [16]
Hamedan 210 14 (6.66) - - - - - - [33]
Ilam 65 54 (83.07) 50 48 (96) 62 62 (100) 56 56 (100) [26,29,34]
Isfahan 157 89 (56.68) 226 219 (96.9) - - - - [14,24]
Kerman 22 14 (63.63) - - - - - - [13]
Razavi Khorasan 277 221 (79.78) 54 46 (88.46) - - - - [20,25,27,28]
Khuzestan - - 140 121 (86.42) - - - - [30]
Lorestan 80 68 (85) - - - - - - [31]
Mazandaran 180 126 (70.0) 100 78 - (78) 45 42 (93.33) [15,23,32]
Semnan 50 40 (80) - - - - - - [18]
Western Azerbaijan 206 71 (34.4) - - - - - - [19]
Western Azerbaijan/Kurdistan/Kermanshah 83 74 (89.15) - - 22 21 (95.45) 10 10 (100) [3]
Open in a new tab

=Study not conducted, No=Number of samples, Pos=Positive samples

Discussion

The present study is the first systematic review of gastrointestinal parasitic infections of carnivores in Iran, providing accurate data for the prevalence of zoonotic parasites from 1997 to 2015. The overall prevalence rate of gastrointestinal parasitic infections among the studied carnivores in Iran was estimated to be 80% (97.32% jackals, 91.89% cats, 89.17% foxes, and 57.89% dogs).

The prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in carnivorous has also been reported in other countries such as 90% in Sri Lanka [8], 71.33 % in Spain [35], and 17.6% in the Czech Republic [36]. These reported prevalence rates are variable and dependent on a number of factors including different detection methods, geographical climate (temperature and humidity), season, behaviors of the local animal populations, and the type of population of carnivores (stray, shelter, and household) [11,30].

Zoonotic pathogens can cause many different types of problem in human and animals ranging from mild-to-serious infection and even death. Zoonotic diseases are of particular concern for high-risk groups particularly children [37,38]. Carnivores, especially dogs and cats, act as the main reservoirs for many zoonotic diseases and play an important role in public health [39].

In Iran, domestic and stray dogs and cats carry the heaviest burden of zoonotic parasites [3]. In many parts of this country, foxes and jackals are also considered as potential sources of infection for humans. Although foxes and jackals generally live in forests and mountainous area, they have been reported proximal to human settlements [29]. As such these animals should be considered in monitoring programs as potential risks for zoonosis due to known interactions with regions of human habitat.

In this systematic review, the investigation of gastrointestinal parasites in carnivores revealed the significant prevalence of six critical zoonotic parasites in Iran including T. canis, E. granulosus, D. caninum, M. lineatus, A. caninum, and M. hirudinaceus. These parasites can cause serious clinical manifestations and diseases in human and should be considered as a major health problem.

D. caninum

D. caninum is a common intestinal tapeworm of carnivorous that infects humans when they accidentally ingest infected fleas. Linnaeus reported the first known human case of dipylidiasis in 1758. There are more than 120 reports of human dipylidiasis in the world with the majority occurring in children due to either accidental ingestion of infected fleas or contact with saliva of pet animals [40,41]. In this study, D. caninum as a zoonotic helminths was the most predominant parasites species in cats (34.31%). Moreover, its prevalence was 32.21% in jackals, 16.89% in dogs, and 4.05% in foxes.

M. lineatus

M. lineatus has a wide distribution in Asia, Europe, and Africa. Reports from Japan, China, and Korea indicate transmission of the parasite to humans can cause diarrhea [42]. In parts of Europe, the adult life stage of this tapeworm occurs with high incidence among foxes (up to 70%) but rarely in cats and dogs (Germany and Switzerland 2-4% and England 14%) [43]. In our study, foxes (51.98%) were the most infected animals with M. lineatus compared to jackals (39.28%), dogs (6.4%), and cats (4.69%).

E. granulosus/multilocularis

E. granulosus is one of the major zoonotic parasitic infections in North Africa and the Middle East. Both E. granulosus and E. multilocularis have been reported from these areas [44,45]. There are three distinct cycles of E. granulosus in Iran:

  1. Dogs and livestock (domestic cycle)

  2. Dogs and camels (desert cycle)

  3. Wild carnivores and wild ruminants (sylvatic cycle).

Hydatid cyst disease is more prevalent in Iran, and it is responsible for nearly 1% of all admission to surgical wards in Iran hospitals. The majority of cases of human and livestock hydatid cysts have been reported from the Khorasan Razavi Province [46]. Moreover, carnivores are considered as a definitive host for E. multilocularis, acquiring the infection from wild rodents, and can be a main zoonotic risk for alveolar cyst in humans [46,47].

Our review study suggests that the overall prevalence of E. granulosus in dogs, jackals, and foxes are 14.61%, 10.71%, and 1.8%, respectively. The global prevalence of echinococcosis in carnivores varies from 1% to 63.5% in East Africa, South Africa, South America, East Europe, and China [48,49].

A potential factor for the high prevalence of E. granulosus in Iran might be due to large populations of stray dogs and the lack of continuous comprehensive control programs, especially for farms and around towns [44,46].

Toxocara spp.

Toxocara species (T. cati, T. canis, and T. leonina) are causative agents of visceral larva migrants in humans. The larva of these parasites can attack the eye cause ocular larva migrants and blindness. Children are the most frequently infected victims of these parasites owing to their close contact with contaminated soil [50]. According to the findings of the current study, the overall prevalence of T. canis/cati was 25.58%, 12.34%, 35.01%, and 22.32% for cats, dogs, foxes, and jackals, respectively. This considerable infection rate may increase the risk of zoonosis to humans and therefore may play an important role in human toxocariasis in Iran. The lowest and highest prevalence rates of this parasite in foxes were reported from Spain (4.4%) [51] and Denmark (81%) [52], respectively. In addition, the minimum and maximum infection rates of T. canis in dogs were reported from Czech Republic 6.2% and Slovak Republic 21.9%, respectively [36,53].

Whereas, the prevalence of T. cati was reported from other countries such as Estonia (48.2%) [54], Spain (55%) [55], and Turkey (62.5%) [56].

M. hirudinaceus

M. hirudinaceus is an acanthocephalan known to infect humans and cause acanthocephaliasis. Although the definitive host for M. hirudinaceus is typically swine, carnivores and humans may act as accidental hosts [57]. Human cases of M. hirudinaceus have been reported from China [58] and Thailand [59]. In our study, 0.38% of dogs, 24.9% of foxes, and 5.3% of jackals were infected with the parasite. Although no human infections have been reported in Iran, this high infection rate could increase the possibility of acquiring infection to humans.

A. caninum

A. caninum is one of the most pathogenic species in carnivores [29]. Larvae of Ancylostoma species cause cutaneous larva migrants or creeping eruption in human. Moreover, these nematodes are responsible for eosinophilic enteritis and unexplained abdominal pain with peripheral eosinophilia in humans [60]. In our study, the prevalence rate of Ancylostoma spp. was similar toxoascaris (8.77% and 8.69%, respectively). Due to the high prevalence of A. caninum in Jackals, they may be considered as the most important reservoir for cutaneous larva migrants in Iranian people.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of the current study, the total prevalence of zoonotic intestinal parasites of carnivores in Iran is over 70%. Therefore, serious and continuous preventive measures should be taken into consideration owing to being a public concern in different provinces of Iran.

Control programs including prevention of environmental contamination with carnivore’s feces, reduction of the dog, cat, foxes, and jackal population, education program about the zoonotic potential of these parasites, and environmental and ecological modifications can reduce the risk of the transmission infection to human.

Authors’ Contributions

SS, AD, MS, and SG conceptualized the concept of this review paper. MTR, MHK, and ABH statistical advisor and critically reviewed the manuscript. SG, SM, and AS prepared the manuscript. AS and SG assisted in collecting and compiling the resource material. All authors read and approved the final manuscript for publication.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the supporting the Toxoplasmosis Research Center (TRC) of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. The authors are thankful to Vice Chancellor of Research of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences for financial support (Grant no. 1599).

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  • 1.Macpherson C.N, Torgerson P.R. Dogs and Cestode Zoonoses. Oxon, UK: Dogs, Zoonoses and Public Health. CABI; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Kohansal M.H, Fazaeli A, Nourian A, Haniloo A, Kamali K. Dogs'gastrointestinal parasites and their association with public health in Iran. J. Vet. Res. 2017;61:189–195. doi: 10.1515/jvetres-2017-0024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Dalimi A, Sattari A, Motamedi G. A study on intestinal helminthes of dogs, foxes and jackals in the western part of Iran. Vet. Parasitol. 2006;142:129–133. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.06.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Satyal R, Manandhar S, Dhakal S, Mahato B, Chaulagain S, Ghimire L. Prevalence of gastrointestinal zoonotic helminths in dogs of Kathmandu, Nepal. Int. J. Infect. Microbiol. 2013;2:91–94. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Chen J, Xu M.J, Zhou D.H, Song H.Q, Wang C.R, Zhu X.Q. Canine and feline parasitic zoonoses in China. Parasit. Vectors. 2012;5:1005–1011. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-5-152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Youn H. Review of zoonotic parasites in medical and veterinary fields in the republic of Korea. Korean J. Parasitol. 2009;47(Suppl):S133–SS41. doi: 10.3347/kjp.2009.47.S.S133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Overgaauw P.A, Van Zutphen L, Hoek D, Yaya F.O, Roelfsema J, Pinelli E, Van Knapen F, Kortbeek L.M. Zoonotic parasites in fecal samples and fur from dogs and cats in the Netherlands. Vet. Parasitol. 2009;163:115–122. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.03.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Perera P, Rajapakse R, Rajakaruna R. Gastrointestinal parasites of dogs in Hantana area in the Kandy district. J. Natl. Sci. Found. Sri. 2013;41:81–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Abere T, Bogale B, Melaku A. Gastrointestinal helminth parasites of pet and stray dogs as a potential risk for human health in Bahir Dar town, North-Western Ethiopia. Vet World. 2013;6:388–392. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Arbabi M, Hooshyar H. Gastrointestinal parasites of stray cats in Kashan, Iran. Trop. Biomed. 2009;26:16–22. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hosseini S.H. Prevalence of Helmentic Infection in Stray Dog in Ardestan City, Iran. 2th Iranian Congress of Parasitology. 1997:193. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Gholami S, Ziaei H, Sharif M. Intestinal helminth parasites in dog and jackal in inferent areas of Sari in the years 1371-1372. J. Mazandaran Univ. Med. Sci. 1999;9:1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Fakhar M, Radfar M.H. Survay of Helmentic Infection in Stray Dogs in Kerman and its Health Implications. 3th Iranian Congress of Parasitology. 2000:190. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Arbabi M, Hooshyar H. Prevalence of parasitic infections in cats in Kashsn, Iran. 5th Iranian Congress of Parasitology. 2005:79. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gholami S, Mobedi I, Dalimi A, Ziaei H, Orouji A, Mohammadpour R.A, Ziapour S.P. Survey of Intestinal Parasite in Stary Cats in Sari City in 2004. 5th Iranian Congress of Parasitology. 2005:76. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zibaei M, Sadjjadi S.M, Sarkari B. Prevalence of Toxocara cati and other intestinal helminths in stray cats in Shiraz, Iran. Trop. Biomed. 2007;24:39–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Zare-Bidaki M, Mobedi I, Ahari S.S, Habibizadeh S, Naddaf S, Siavashi M. Prevalence of zoonotic intestinal helminths of canids in Moghan plain, Northwestern Iran. Iran J. Parasitol. 2010;5:42. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Eslami A, Ranjbar-Bahadori S, Meshgi B, Dehghan M, Bokaie S. Helminth infections of stray dogs from Garmsar, Semnan province, Central Iran. Iran J. Parasitol. 2010;5:37. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Tavasoli MJS, Soltaninejad F, Rasouli S, Etminanfar R. Gastrointestinal parasites of pet dogs in Urmia city. Vet. J. (Pajouhesh &Sazandegi) 2010;87:18–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Borji H, Razmi G, Ahmadi A, Karami H, Yaghfoori S, Abedi V. A survey on endoparasites and ectoparasites of stray cats from Mashhad (Iran) and association with risk factors. J. Parasit. Dis. 2011;35:202–206. doi: 10.1007/s12639-011-0057-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Khanmohammadi M, Fallah E, Reyhani-Rad S. Epidemiological studies on fauna and preva-lence of parasite helminthes on red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in Sarab district, East Azerbaijan province, Iran. Ann. Biol. Res. 2011;2:246–251. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Gharehdaghi Y, Mashaei S.S. Prevalence of gastrointestinal helminthic infestation in pet and stray dogs in Tabriz (East-Azerbaijan Province), Iran. J Anim. Vet. Adv. 2011;10:1477–1479. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Gholami S, Daryani A, Sharif M, Amouei A, Mobedi I. Seroepidemiological survey of helminthic parasites of stray dogs in Sari City, Northern Iran. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2011;14:133–137. doi: 10.3923/pjbs.2011.133.137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Pestechian N, Yoosefi H.A. Distribution of intestinal worms among stray dogs in Isfahan, Iran. J. Isfahan Med. Sch. 2012;29:1–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Emampour S.R, Nghibi A. Prevalence of Intestinal Parasites in Stray Dogs in Mashhad City. 2nd ed. Iran: National Cangress of Veteinary Labratory Science Semnan; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Abdi J, Asadolahi K, Maleki M.H, Ashrafi A. Prevalence of helminthes infection of stray dogs in Ilam province. J. Paramed. Sci (JPS) 2013;4:47–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Adinezadeh A, Beigom Kia E, Mohebali M, Shojaee S, Rokni M.B, Zarei Z, Mowlavi G. Endoparasites of stray dogs in Mashhad, Khorasan Razavi province, Northeast Iran with special reference to zoonotic parasites. Iran J. Parasitol. 2013;8:459. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Beiromvand M, Akhlaghi L, Massom SHF, Meamar A.R, Motevalian A, Oormazdi H, Razmjou E. Prevalence of zoonotic intestinal parasites in domestic and stray dogs in a rural area of Iran. Prev. Vet. Med. 2013;109:162–167. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.09.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Razmjoo M, Bahrami A.M, Shamsollahi M. Seroepidemiological survey of important parasitic infections of wild carnivores. Int. J. Adv. Biol. Biomed. Res. 2014;2:783–792. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Khademvatan S, Abdizadeh R, Hashemitabar M, Ghasemi M, Tavalla M. Stray cats gastrointestinal parasites and its association with public health in Ahvaz City, South Western of Iran. Jundishapur J. Microbiol. 2014;7:1–6. doi: 10.5812/jjm.11079. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Parsa F, Vosoghi H, Razani M. Study of intestinal parasite of stray dog in Lorestan province of Iran. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2014;8:27–30. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Sarvi S, Daryani A, Sharif M, Rahimi M.T, Azami D, Marhaba Z, Ahmadpour E, Mizani A. Domestic dog as a human health hazard in north of Iran. J. Parasit. Dis. 2014;40:930–934. doi: 10.1007/s12639-014-0608-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gharekhani J. Study on gastrointestinal zoonotic parasites in pet dogs in Western Iran. Türkiye Parazitolo. Derg. 2014;38:172. doi: 10.5152/tpd.2014.3546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Bahrami A.M, Shamsi M. Zoonotic Parasitic infections of cats in human community:A histopathological study. J. Basic Res. Med. Sci. 2015;2:49–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Martínez-Moreno F, Hernández S, López-Cobos E, Becerra C, Acosta I, Martínez-Moreno A. Estimation of canine intestinal parasites in Cordoba (Spain) and their risk to public health. Vet. Parasitol. 2007;143:7–13. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Dubná S, Langrová I, Nápravník J, Jankovská I, Vadlejch J, Pekár S, Fechtner J. The prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs from Prague, rural areas, and shelters of the Czech Republic. Vet. Parasitol. 2007;145:120–128. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Trevejo R.T, Barr M.C, Robinson R.A. Important emerging bacterial zoonotic infections affecting the immunocompromised. Vet. Res. 2005;36:493–506. doi: 10.1051/vetres:2005011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Burroughs T, Knobler S, Lederberg J. The Emergence of Zoonotic Diseases: Understanding the Impact on Animal and Human Health-Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2002. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Kruse H, Kirkemo A.M, Handeland K. Wildlife as source of zoonotic infections. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004;10:2067–2072. doi: 10.3201/eid1012.040707. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Narasimham M, Panda P, Mohanty I, Sahu S, Padhi S, Dash M. Dipylidium caninum infection in a child:A rare case report. Indian J. Med. Microbiol. 2013;31:82–84. doi: 10.4103/0255-0857.108738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Reid C, Perry F, Evans N. Dipylidium caninum in an infant. Eur. J. Pediatr. 1992;151(7):502–503. doi: 10.1007/BF01957754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Miyazaki I. An illustrated book of helminthic zoonoses. Parasitol. Today. 1991;7:359. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Wirtherle N, Wiemann A, Ottenjann M, Linzmann H, Van der Grinten E, Kohn B, Gruber A.D, Clausen P.H. First case of canine peritoneal larval cestodosis caused by Mesocestoides lineatus in Germany. Parasitol. Int. 2007;56:317–320. doi: 10.1016/j.parint.2007.06.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sadjjadi S.M. Present situation of echinococcosis in the Middle East and Arabic North Africa. Parasitol. Int. 2006;55:S197–S202. doi: 10.1016/j.parint.2005.11.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Kachani M, Heath D. Dog population management for the control of human echinococcosis. Acta Trop. 2014;139:99–108. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2014.05.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rokni M. Echinococcosis/hydatidosis in Iran. Iran J. Parasitol. 2009;4:1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Beiromvand M, Akhlaghi L, Massom SHF, Mobedi I, Meamar A.R, Oormazdi H, Motevalian A, Razmjou E. Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis in carnivores in Razavi Khorasan province, Iran using mitochondrial DNA. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2011;5:e1379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Andererson F, Ouhelli H, Kachani M. Cystic echinococcosis in Africa south of the Sahara. Compendium on cystic echinococcosis in Africa and in Middle Eastern Countries with special reference to Morocco. Brigh. Young Univ. 1997;617:345. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Rausch R. Life Cycle Patterns and Geographic Distribution of Echinococcus Species Echinococcus and hydatid disease CAB International, Wallingford. 1995:89–134. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Okulewicz A, Perec-Matysiak A, Buńkowska K, Hildebrand J. Toxocara canis, Toxocara cati and Toxascaris leonina in wild and domestic carnivores. Helminthologia. 2012;49:3–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Criado-Fornelio A, Gutierrez-Garcia L, Rodriguez-Caabeiro F, Reus-Garcia E, Roldan-Soriano M, Diaz-Sanchez M. A parasitological survey of wild red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from the province of Guadalajara, Spain. Vet. Parasitol. 2000;92:245–251. doi: 10.1016/s0304-4017(00)00329-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Willingham A.L, Ockens N, Kapel C.M, Monrad J. A helminthological survey of wild red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from the metropolitan area of Copenhagen. J. Helminthol. 1996;70:259–263. doi: 10.1017/s0022149x00015509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Szabová E, Juriš P, Miterpáková M, Antolová D, Papajová I, Šefčíková H. Prevalence of important zoonotic parasites in dog populations from the Slovak Republic. Helminthologia. 2007;44:170–176. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Talvik H, Moks E, Mägi E, Järvis T, Miller I. Distribution of Toxocara infection in the environment and in definitive and paratenic hosts in Estonia. Acta Vet. Hung. 2006;54:399–406. doi: 10.1556/AVet.54.2006.3.10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Calvete C, Lucientes J, Castillo J.A, Estrada R, Gracia M, Peribáñez M.A, Ferrer M. Gastrointestinal helminth parasites in stray cats from the mid-Ebro Valley, Spain. Vet. Parasitol. 1998;75:235–240. doi: 10.1016/s0304-4017(97)00182-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Yaman M, Ayaz E, Gül A, Muz M.N. Investigation of helminth infections of cats and dogs in the Hatay province. Turkiye Parazitolo. Derg. 2005;30:200–204. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Kassai T. Veterinary helminthology. London, UK: Acribia, SA; 2002. p. 258. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Zhong H, Feng L, Wang C, Kang B, Wang Z. Human infection with Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus causing serious complications in China. Chin. Med. J. 1983;96:661–668. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Hemsrichart V, Pichyangkura C, Chitchang S, Vutichamnong U. Eosinophilic enteritis due to Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus infection:Report of 3 cases. J. Med. Assoc. Thai. 1983;66:303–310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Ngui R, Lim Y.A, Traub R, Mahmud R, Mistam M.S. Epidemiological and genetic data supporting the transmission of Ancylostoma ceylanicum among human and domestic animals. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2012;6:e1522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Veterinary World are provided here courtesy of Veterinary World

RESOURCES