No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundCanine leishmaniasis (CanL) is a zoonotic disease caused by Leishmania infantum, a Trypanosomatid protozoan transmitted by phlebotomine sandflies. Leishmaniasis is endemic in southern France, but the influences of environmental and climatic factors on its maintenance and emergence remain poorly understood. From a retrospective database, including all the studies reporting prevalence or incidence of CanL in France between 1965 and 2007, we performed a spatial analysis in order to i) map the reported cases in France, and ii) produce an environment-based map of the areas at risk for CanL. We performed a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) followed by a Hierarchical Ascendant Classification (HAC) to assess if the locations of CanL could be grouped according to environmental variables related to climate, forest cover, and human and dog densities. For each group, the potential distribution of CanL in France was mapped using a species niche modelling approach (Maxent model).ResultsResults revealed the existence of two spatial groups of CanL cases. The first group is located in the Cévennes region (southern Massif Central), at altitudes of 200-1000 m above sea level, characterized by relatively low winter temperatures (1.9°C average), 1042 mm average annual rainfall and much forest cover. The second group is located on the Mediterranean coastal plain, characterized by higher temperatures, lower rainfall and less forest cover. These two groups may correspond to the environments favoured by the two sandfly vectors in France, Phlebotomus ariasi and Phlebotomus perniciosus respectively. Our niche modelling of these two eco-epidemiological patterns was based on environmental variables and led to the first risk map for CanL in France.ConclusionResults show how an ecological approach can help to improve our understanding of the spatial distribution of CanL in France.

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long‐term clinical outcome for dogs with leishmaniasis that were treated with 3 different protocols: combined treatment with antimony and allopurinol, antimony alone, or allopurinol alone. Ninety‐six dogs included in this study were determined to have leishmaniasis on the basis of (1) clinical features, (2) identification of the parasite in smears of lymph node, bone marrow aspirates, or skin biopsies, and (3) specific immunofluorescent assay. Three groups of dogs were defined: 45 dogs (group 1) were treated with antimony (100 mg/kg SC q24h) given concurrently for 1 month with allopurinol (15 mg/kg PO q12h), and then allopurinol alone for 8 months at the same dosage; 40 dogs (group 2) were treated with antimony alone according to the manufacturer's instructions (200 mg/kg SC q24h at 2‐day intervals for 3–6 months); and 11 dogs (group 3) were treated with allopurinol alone (15 mg/kg PO q12h for 1–20 months). Information concerning signalment, history, physical examination findings, serologic testing and number of dogs becoming seronegative, outcome for each treated dog (clinical cure versus failure), and long‐term survival were recorded. The numbers of the clinical cures versus failures were significantly different among the 3 groups (χ2= 17.77, P < .001), between groups 1 and 2 (χ2= 8.02, P < .01), between groups 2 and 3 (χ2= 11.00, P < .01), and between groups 1 and 3 (χ2= 16.52, P < .001). No significant difference between groups 1 and 2 was noted in the type of failure (relapse or death), serologic test results, and number of survival years (χ2= 2.79, P > .05). The results of the present study indicate that antimony in combination with allopurinol produces better results than antimony alone or allopurinol alone for the treatment of the canine leishmaniasis. With combination treatment, duration of treatment with antimony is shorter and long‐term administration of allopurinol is well tolerated.

The human-animal bond has been a fundamental feature of mankind's history for millennia. The first, and strongest of these, man's relationship with the dog, is believed to pre-date even agriculture, going back as far as 30,000 years. It remains at least as powerful today. Fed by the changing nature of the interactions between people and their dogs worldwide and the increasing tendency towards close domesticity, the health of dogs has never played a more important role in family life. Thanks to developments in scientific understanding and diagnostic techniques, as well as changing priorities of pet owners, veterinarians are now able, and indeed expected, to play a fundamental role in the prevention and treatment of canine disease, including canine vector-borne diseases (CVBDs).The CVBDs represent a varied and complex group of diseases, including anaplasmosis, babesiosis, bartonellosis, borreliosis, dirofilariosis, ehrlichiosis, leishmaniosis, rickettsiosis and thelaziosis, with new syndromes being uncovered every year. Many of these diseases can cause serious, even life-threatening clinical conditions in dogs, with a number having zoonotic potential, affecting the human population.Today, CVBDs pose a growing global threat as they continue their spread far from their traditional geographical and temporal restraints as a result of changes in both climatic conditions and pet dog travel patterns, exposing new populations to previously unknown infectious agents and posing unprecedented challenges to veterinarians.In response to this growing threat, the CVBD World Forum, a multidisciplinary group of experts in CVBDs from around the world which meets on an annual basis, gathered in Nice (France) in 2011 to share the latest research on CVBDs and discuss the best approaches to managing these diseases around the world.As a result of these discussions, we, the members of the CVBD Forum have developed the following recommendations to veterinarians for the management of CVBDs.