Comparison of three laboratorial tests for diagnosis of canine parvovirus infection

Polymerase chain reaction combined with fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay based on magnetic purification for rapid detection of canine parvovirus 2

“…The clinical signs resemble other enteric diseases and hence rapid and early diagnosis of the condition has become ever more urgent. Traditional methods such as virus isolation and electron microscopy are time-consuming, less sensitive, and expensive [35, 36]. Serological tests could detect the antibody, but fail to detect the acute infection.…”

“…The commercial SNAP test is commonly used for rapid detection of CPV-2 on site, but it was less sensitive than PCR-based assays because it does not amplify the detection target during the test [7–9, 37]. Haemagglutination and immunochromatographic tests are widely used and simple, but they are less sensitive and always require fresh samples [8, 36]. Hence, these tests are now replaced by molecular methods like PCR which has high specificity and sensitivity than the traditional methods [38, 39].…”

Utility of a rapid immunochromatographic strip test in detecting canine parvovirus infection compared with polymerase chain reaction

“…Serological tests could detect the antibody, but fail to detect the acute infection. The widely used HA HI tests are simple, but are less sensitive and always require supply of fresh erythrocytes [ 5 , 7 ]. Hence, these tests are now replaced by molecular methods like PCR which is having high specificity [ 12 ] and sensitivity [ 13 ] than the conventional antigen or antibody-based methods.…”

“…Thus, although EM and virus isolation are highly specific, they are not often used routinely in a clinical setting [ 6 ]. Hemagglutination test seems to be acceptable in routine diagnosis because the test is relatively simple, rapid, and inexpensive, but it is less sensitive and specific [ 7 ]. Serological tests fail to diagnose infections in acute stages.…”