Parasitology Research

, Volume 105, Supplement 1, pp 115–124 | Cite as

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Two Treatment Regimens with a Topically Applied Combination of Imidacloprid and Moxidectin (Advocate®) against Generalised Demodicosis in Dogs

  • Josephus J. Fourie
  • Petrus C. Delport
  • Leon J. Fourie
  • Josef Heine
  • Ivan G. Horak
  • Klemens J. Krieger
Article

Abstract

This laboratory study compared the efficacy of two treatment regimens using an imidacloprid (10 %) /moxidectin (2.5 %) topical formulation (Advocate®, Bayer) on dogs with generalised demodicosis. Sixteen dogs were randomly allocated to two equal groups. One group was treated at 28-day intervals for 12 weeks and the second group at weekly intervals for 15 weeks. Mite numbers were estimated and demodectic lesions were evaluated on each dog before treatment and at approximately 28-day intervals thereafter. Consistently greater reduction in mite numbers was recorded for the weekly treatment regimen. Dogs treated at weekly intervals exhibited markedly fewer clinical signs and greater hair regrowth and weight gain than those treated at 28-day intervals. To assess the safety of a weekly treatment interval in dogs, a study was done in which the investigational compound was administered at weekly intervals at five times the recommended dose for a period of 16 consecutive weeks. Apart from transient erythema at the site of administration in one dog and scaliness of the skin in another, no clinical signs of toxicity could be observed. Assessment of 27 blood parameters indicated that only basophils were outside the reference values on days +13 and +69, during the safety trial period.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carter GR (2001) External parasitic diseases of dogs and cats. In: A concise guide to infectious deseases of dogs and cats (Ed: Carter GR), International Veterinary Information Service, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  2. Fourie LJ, Heine J (2005) Evaluation of the efficacy of Advocate® (moxidectin 2.5 % and imidacloprid 10 %) spot-on against Demodex spp. mites on dogs with generalised demodicosis. Proc. 6th Int. Ectoparasite Control Symp., BSVA Congress, April 6, 2005, Birmingham, UK, published by UK-Vet Publications, pp. 32–36.Google Scholar
  3. Fourie LJ, Kok DJ, du Plessis A, Rugg D (2007) Efficacy of a novel formulation of metaflumizone plus amitraz for the treatment of demodectic mange in dogs. Vet Parasit 150:268–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Heine J, Krieger K, Fourie L, Dumont P, Radelof I (2005) Imidacloprid 10 % and moxidectin 2.5 % spot-on (Advocate®) for treatment of demodicosis in dogs. 8th International Symposium on Ectoparasites of Pets, May 8–11, 2005, Hannover, GermanGoogle Scholar
  5. Howell CJ, Walker J, Nevill EM (1978) Ticks, mites and insects infesting domestic animals in South Africa. Part 1. Descriptions and biology. Department of Agricultural Technical Services, Republic of South Africa, Science Bulletin, No. 393.Google Scholar
  6. Kwochka KW, Kunkle GA, Foil CO (1985) The efficacy of amitraz for generalized demodicosis in dogs: A study of two concentrations and frequencies of application. Comp Cont Educ Pract Vet 7:8–17Google Scholar
  7. Medleau L, Ristic Z (1994) Treating chronic refractory demodicosis in dogs. Vet Med 89:775–777Google Scholar
  8. Medleau L, Willemse T (1995) Efficacy of daily amitraz on generalised demodicosis in dogs. J Small Anim Pract 36:3–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Miller WHJR, Scott DW, Cayatte SM, Buerger RG, Bagladi MS (1995) Clinical efficacy of increased dosages of milbemycin oxime for treatment of generalised demodicosis in adult dogs. JAVMA 207:1581–1584PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Miller WHJR, Scott DW, Wellington JR, Paniá R (1993) Clinical efficacy of milbemycin oxime in treatment of generalised demodicosis in adult dogs. JAVMA 203:1426–1429PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mueller RS (2004) Treatment protocols for demodicosis: an evidence-based review. Vet Dermatol 15:75–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Paradis M (1999) New approaches to the treatment of canine demodicosis. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 29:1425–1436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Paradis M, Pagé N (1998) Topical (pour-on) ivermectin in the treatment of chronic generalised demodicosis in dogs. Vet Dermatol 9:55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Paul AJ, Hutchens DE, Firkins LD, Borgstrom M (2004) Dermal safety study with imidacloprid/moxidectin topical solution in the ivermectin-sensitive collie. Vet Parasit 121:285–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shaw SE, Foster AP (2000) Treatment of canine adult-onset demodicosis. Aust Vet J 78:243–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Shipstone M (2000) Generalised demodicosis in dogs, clinical perspective. Aust Vet J 78:240–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Soulsby EJL (1982) Helminths, arthropods and protozoa of domesticated animals. Baillière Tindall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Wagner R, Wendlberger U (2000) Field efficacy of moxidectin in dogs and rabbits naturally infested with Sarcoptes spp., Demodex spp. and Psoroptes spp. mites. Vet. Parasitol 93:149–158Google Scholar
  19. Zumpt F (1961) The arthropod parasites of vertebrates in Africa South of the Sahara (Etiopian region). Vol. I Chelicerata. South African Institute of Medical Research, Johannesburg.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josephus J. Fourie
    • 1
  • Petrus C. Delport
    • 1
  • Leon J. Fourie
    • 1
  • Josef Heine
    • 2
  • Ivan G. Horak
    • 3
  • Klemens J. Krieger
    • 2
  1. 1.ClinVet InternationalUniversitasSouth Africa
  2. 2.Bayer Animal Health GmbHAnimal Health DivisionLeverkusenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Zoology and EntomologyUniversity of the Free StateBloemfonteinSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations