Advertisement

Acta Parasitologica

, Volume 61, Issue 3, pp 544–548 | Cite as

Prevalence and risk factors associated with endoparasitosis of dogs and cats in Espírito Santo, Brazil

  • Diefrey Ribeiro Campos
  • Luanna Castro Oliveira
  • Daniele Fassina de Siqueira
  • Lívia Reisen Perin
  • Nayara Camatta Campos
  • Karina Preising Aptekmann
  • Isabella Vilhena Freire MartinsEmail author
Article

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and risk factors for the occurrence of endoparasitosis in dogs and cats in Espírito Santo, Brazil. For the study, 345 dogs and 160 cats were examined. Faecal samples from the animals were collected, and owners were interviewed about their handling of their animals. For the diagnosis of the infections, the Willis-Molley, simple centrifugal flotation and formalin-ether sedimentation techniques were performed. The data found in the tests were tabulated and analysed with a chi-square test (p <0.05), and calculation of odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals of 95% were then performed to determine the association between the variables and the outcome of stool examinations. The prevalence of parasites was 59% for dogs and 54% for cats. The genus Ancylostoma was the most prevalent (45%). Supplying filtered water, not feeding raw foods, standardisation of a defecation site and cleaning up the faeces reduced the chances of developing intestinal parasites. An increased frequency of deworming was also shown to be a protective factor; specifically animals which received anthelmintic more than once a year had a lower predisposition for intestinal parasites.

Keywords

Faecal exams intestinal parasites pets prevalence risk factors worms 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blaszkowska J., Wojcik A., Kurnatowski P., Szwabe K. 2013. Geohelminth egg contamination of children’s areas in the city of Lodz (Poland). Veterinary Parasitology, 192, 228–233. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2012.09.033 xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bresciani K.D.S., Ishizaki M.N., Kaneto C.N., Montano T.R.P., Perri S.H.V., Vasconcelos R.O., Do Nascimento A.A. 2008. Parasitary frequency and intensity of gastroenteric helmints in dogs in Araçatuba´S urban area, SP. Ars Veterinária, 24, 181–185. DOI: 10.15361/2175-0106.2008v24n3p181-185 (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
  3. Coelho W.M.D., Amarante A.F.T., Soutello R.V.G., Meireles M.V., Bresciani K.D.S. 2009. Occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites in fecal samples of cats in Andradina City, São Paulo. Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinaria, 18, 46–49. DOI: 10.4322/rbpv.01802010 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dall´Agnol L.P., Otto M.A., Da Silva A. S., Monteiro S.G. 2010. Gastrointestinal parasites in naturally infected cats in the municipality of Santa Maria in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Acta Veterinaria Brasilica, 4, 181–184 (In Portuguese)Google Scholar
  5. Eguia-Aguilar P., Cruz-Reyes A., Martinez-Maya J.J. 2005. Ecological analysis and description of the intestinal helminths present in dogs in Mexico City. Veterinary Parasitology, 127, 139–146. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2004.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fortes E. 1987. Parasitologia Veterinaria. Sullivan, Porto Alegre. pp. 455Google Scholar
  7. Funada M.R., Pena H.F.J., Soares R.M., Amaku M., Gennari S.M. 2007. Frequency of gastrointestinal parasites in dogs and cats referred to a veterinary school hospital in the city of São Paulo. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, 59, 1338–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gajadhar A.A., Allen J.R. 2004. Factors contributing to the public health and economic importance of waterborne zoonotic parasites. Veterinary Parasitology, 126,3–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2004.09.009 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gawor J., Borecka A. 2015. Risk of soil-transmitted helminth infections on agritourism farms in central and eastern Poland. Acta Parasitologica, 60, 716–72. DOI: 10.1515/ap-2015-0102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gennari S.M., Kasai N., Pena H.F.J., Cortez A. 1999. Occurrence of protozoa and helminths in faecal samples of dogs and cats from São Paulo city. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science, 36,87–91. DOI: 10.1590/S1413-95961999000200006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gracenea M., Gómez M.S., Torres J. 2009. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in shelter dogs and cats in the metropolitan area of Barcelona (Spain). Acta Parasitologica, 54, 73–77. DOI: 10.2478/s11686-009-0005-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kopp S.R., Kotze A.C., Coleman G.T. 2008. Application of in vitro anthelmintic sensitivity assays to canine parasitology: Detecting resistance to pyrantel in Ancylostoma caninum. Veterinary Parasitology, 152,284–293. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2007.12.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kopp, S.R., Kotze A.C., McCarthy J.S., Coleman G.T. 2007. Highlevel pyrantel resistance in the hookworm Ancylostoma caninum. Veterinary Parasitology, 143, 299–304. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.08.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lorenzini G., Tasca T., De Carli G.A. 2007. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs and cats under veterinary care in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research, 2, 137–145 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Magnaval J.F., Glickman L.T., Dorchies P. 1994. Toxocariasis a major helminth zoonosis. Revue de Médecine Vetérinaire, 145, 611–627. DOI: 10.1017/S003118200999087Google Scholar
  16. Mircean V., Titilincu A., Vasile C. 2010. Prevalence of endoparasites in household cat (Felis catus) populations from Transylvania (Romania) and association with risk factors. Veterinary Parasitology, 171, 163–166 DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.03.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mundim T.C.D., Oliveira Júnior S.D., Rodrigues D.C., Cury M.C. 2004. Frequency of helminthes parasites in cats of Uberlândia, Minas Gerais. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinaria e Zootecnia, 56, 562–563 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nareaho A., Puomio J., Saarinen K., Jokelainen P., Juselius T., Sukura A. 2012. Feline intestinal parasites in Finland: prevalence, risk factors and anthelmintic treatment practices. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, 14, 378–383. DOI: 10.1177/1098612X12439257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Palmer C.S., Thompson R.C., Traub R.J., Rees R., Robertson I.D. 2008. National study of the gastrointestinal parasites of dogs and cats in Australia. Veterinary Parasitology, 151, 181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oliveira-Sequeira T., Amarante A.F.T., Ferrari T.B., Nunes L.C. 2002. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs from Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Veterinary Parasitology, 103, 19–27.DOI: 10.1016/S0304-4017(01)00575-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pereira M. G. 1995. Epidemiologia: teoria e prática. Guanabara Koogan, Rio de Janeiro. pp. 596Google Scholar
  22. Pivoto F.L., Lopes L.F.D., Flores F.S.F., Vogel S.A.B., Sangioni L.A. 2013. Occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites and parasitism risk factors in domestic cats in Santa Maria, RS, Brazil. Ciência Rural, 43, 1453–1458 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pullola T., Vierimaa J., Saari S., Vinala A.M., Nikander S. 2006. Canine intestinal helminths in Finland: Prevalence, risk factors and endoparasite control practices. Veterinary Parasitology, 140, 321–326. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.04.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ramirez-Barrioes R.A., Barboza-Mena G., Munoz J., Angulo-Cubillan F., Hernandez E., Gonzalez F., Escalona F. 2004. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs under veterinary care in Maracaibo, Venezuela. Veterinary Parasitology, 121, 11–20.DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2004.02.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ribeiro L.M., Dracz R.M., Mozzer L.R., Lima W.S. 2013. Soil contamination in public squares in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, by canine Parasites in diferente developmental stages. Revista Intituto de Medicina Tropical de São Paulo, 55, 229–231.DOI: 10.1590/S0036-46652013000400002 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ritchie L.S. 1948. An ether sedimentation technique for a routine stool examinations. Bulletin of the United States Army Medical Departament, 8, 326Google Scholar
  27. Robertson I.D., Irwin P.J., Lymbery A.J., Thompson R.C.A. 2000. The role of companion animals in the emergence of parasitic zoonoses. Institute Journal Parasitology, 30,1369–1377. DOI: 10.1016/S0020-7519(00)00134-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Romano N., Soo C.L., Nan J.Y., Tiong K.T., Roslan M.A., Kek H.C., Shafie A., Wan Y.W.S., Arine F.A., Rohela M., Yvonne L.A.L. 2014. Gastrointestinal parasites in rural dogs and cats in Selangor and Pahang states in Peninsular Malaysia. Acta Parasitologica, 59, 737–744.DOI: 10.2478/s11686-014-0306-3Google Scholar
  29. Serra C.M.B., Uchôa C.M.A., Coimbra R.A. 2003. Parasitological study with faecal samples of stray and domiciliated cats (Felis catus domesticus) from the Metropolitan Area of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, 36, 331–334.DOI: 10.1590/S0037-86822003000300003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sloss M.W., Zajac A.M., Kemp, R.L. 1999. Parasitologia Clínica Veterinária. Guanabara Koogan, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 198Google Scholar
  31. Soulsby E.J.L. 1987. Parasitologia y enfermedades parasitarias en los animales domésticos. Interamericana, México, pp. 823Google Scholar
  32. Stalliviere F.M., Bellato V., Souza A.P.de, Sartor A.A., Moura A.B.de, Rosa L.D. 2009. Ectoparasites and intestinal helminthes in Felis catus domesticus from Lages city, SC, Brazil and socialeconomical and cultural aspects of owners of family pets. Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinária, 18, 26–31. DOI: 10.4322/rbpv.01804005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Traversa D. 2012. Pet roundworms and hookworms: A continuing need for global worming. Parasites & Vectors, 5, 91.DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-5-91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Urquhart G.M., Armour J., Duncan J.L., Dunn A.M., Jennings F.W. Parasitologia Veterinária. 2ª. Ed.. Guanabara Koogan, Rio de Janeiro. 1998. pp. 306Google Scholar
  35. Vasconcellos M.C., Barros J.S.L., Oliveira C.S. 2006. Intestinal parasitic helminths in institutionalized dogs of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Revista de Saúde Pública, 40, 321–323. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-89102006000200020 (In Portuguese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Willis H.H. 1921. A simple levitation method for the detection of hookworm ova. Medical Journal of Australia, 8, 375–376Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Witold Stefański Institute of Parasitology, Polish Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diefrey Ribeiro Campos
    • 1
  • Luanna Castro Oliveira
    • 2
  • Daniele Fassina de Siqueira
    • 2
  • Lívia Reisen Perin
    • 2
  • Nayara Camatta Campos
    • 2
  • Karina Preising Aptekmann
    • 3
  • Isabella Vilhena Freire Martins
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Veterinarian, Graduate Program in Veterinary SciencesFederal University of Espírito SantoBrazil
  2. 2.Student Course of Veterinary MedicineFederal University of Espírito SantoBrazil
  3. 3.Veterinarian, Dr. Department of Veterinary MedicineFederal University of Espírito SantoBrazil
  4. 4.Veterinarian, Dr. Federal Department of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of Espírito SantoAlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations