James E Bogan, Alexandra K Mason, Katrina Mishel, Michael M Garner, Heather D S Walden, April Childress, James F X Wellehan, Robert J Ossiboff, Robert Dahlhausen
{"title":"Comparison of sampling techniques and diagnostic tests for Cryptosporidium serpentis in eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon couperi).","authors":"James E Bogan, Alexandra K Mason, Katrina Mishel, Michael M Garner, Heather D S Walden, April Childress, James F X Wellehan, Robert J Ossiboff, Robert Dahlhausen","doi":"10.2460/ajvr.24.05.0136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare various sampling techniques and commercially available diagnostic tests for Cryptosporidium serpentis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A colony of 80 eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon couperi) in human care was screened for the presence of C serpentis using endoscopic gastric mucosal biopsies for histologic and molecular analyses. At the time of endoscopic examination and biopsy, a cloacal swab, gastric swab, and gastric lavage sample were also collected. A C serpentis-specific probe hybridization quantitative PCR (qPCR) was performed on each sample. The gastric lavage sample was divided equally for direct microscopy, acid-fast stain, rapid qualitative immunochromatographic assay, direct fluorescent antibody, and 5 different PCR analyses. If a fecal sample was available at the time of endoscopic evaluation, it was also evaluated for Cryptosporidium oocysts by direct microscopy and acid-fast staining.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When comparing test results to histologic analyses, the sensitivity of the probe hybridization qPCR of gastric biopsy, gastric lavage, and gastric swab was 100% while the cloacal swab was 72%. When gastric lavage tests were compared, qPCRs outperformed the other tests.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Endoscopic biopsy for histologic and qPCR analyses is recommended for disease diagnosis, while gastric lavage or gastric swab samples for qPCR analysis are as sensitive as endoscopic biopsy for screening for the pathogen but cannot diagnose disease.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The results from this study allow the veterinary practitioner to select the most appropriate sample and testing methodology when evaluating an ophidian patient for gastric cryptosporidiosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":7754,"journal":{"name":"American journal of veterinary research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of veterinary research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.24.05.0136","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare various sampling techniques and commercially available diagnostic tests for Cryptosporidium serpentis.
Methods: A colony of 80 eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon couperi) in human care was screened for the presence of C serpentis using endoscopic gastric mucosal biopsies for histologic and molecular analyses. At the time of endoscopic examination and biopsy, a cloacal swab, gastric swab, and gastric lavage sample were also collected. A C serpentis-specific probe hybridization quantitative PCR (qPCR) was performed on each sample. The gastric lavage sample was divided equally for direct microscopy, acid-fast stain, rapid qualitative immunochromatographic assay, direct fluorescent antibody, and 5 different PCR analyses. If a fecal sample was available at the time of endoscopic evaluation, it was also evaluated for Cryptosporidium oocysts by direct microscopy and acid-fast staining.
Results: When comparing test results to histologic analyses, the sensitivity of the probe hybridization qPCR of gastric biopsy, gastric lavage, and gastric swab was 100% while the cloacal swab was 72%. When gastric lavage tests were compared, qPCRs outperformed the other tests.
Conclusions: Endoscopic biopsy for histologic and qPCR analyses is recommended for disease diagnosis, while gastric lavage or gastric swab samples for qPCR analysis are as sensitive as endoscopic biopsy for screening for the pathogen but cannot diagnose disease.
Clinical relevance: The results from this study allow the veterinary practitioner to select the most appropriate sample and testing methodology when evaluating an ophidian patient for gastric cryptosporidiosis.
期刊介绍：
The American Journal of Veterinary Research supports the collaborative exchange of information between researchers and clinicians by publishing novel research findings that bridge the gulf between basic research and clinical practice or that help to translate laboratory research and preclinical studies to the development of clinical trials and clinical practice. The journal welcomes submission of high-quality original studies and review articles in a wide range of scientific fields, including anatomy, anesthesiology, animal welfare, behavior, epidemiology, genetics, heredity, infectious disease, molecular biology, oncology, pharmacology, pathogenic mechanisms, physiology, surgery, theriogenology, toxicology, and vaccinology. Species of interest include production animals, companion animals, equids, exotic animals, birds, reptiles, and wild and marine animals. Reports of laboratory animal studies and studies involving the use of animals as experimental models of human diseases are considered only when the study results are of demonstrable benefit to the species used in the research or to another species of veterinary interest. Other fields of interest or animals species are not necessarily excluded from consideration, but such reports must focus on novel research findings. Submitted papers must make an original and substantial contribution to the veterinary medicine knowledge base; preliminary studies are not appropriate.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
