Cattle gastrointestinal nematode egg-spiked faecal samples: high recovery rates using the Mini-FLOTAC technique

Abstract

Background: Faecal egg count (FEC) techniques are commonly used to detect gastrointestinal nematodes (GINs) in cattle and to determine anthelmintic efficacy/resistance through the faecal egg count reduction test (FECRT). Mini-FLOTAC is one of the techniques recommended for a standardised FEC/FECRT of helminth eggs in cattle. However, only one paper evaluated the recovery rate of GIN eggs by Mini-FLOTAC (compared to McMaster and modified-Wisconsin method) in cattle, using only a level of contamination of 200 eggs per gram (EPG) of faeces and using GIN eggs collected from goat faeces to spike faecal samples from cattle. To further study the recovery rate of GIN eggs from cattle faeces, this study was conducted in two laboratories, one in Belgium and one in Italy to evaluate the sensitivity, accuracy, precision and reproducibility of the Mini-FLOTAC and McMaster techniques (at two reading levels: grids and chambers) for the detection of GIN eggs in spiked bovine faecal samples. Methods: In both countries, spiked cattle faecal samples with five different levels of egg contamination (10, 50, 100, 200 and 500 EPG) of GINs were used. The study was performed in both laboratories by the same expert operator and using the same standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the Mini-FLOTAC and McMaster techniques. Sensitivity, accuracy and precision were calculated for each technique and for each level of contamination. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate differences in performance between the two techniques. Results: Mini-FLOTAC had a higher sensitivity (100% at all EPG levels for Mini-FLOTAC vs 0-66.6% for McMaster chambers and grids at levels< 100 EPG), a higher accuracy (98.1% mean value for Mini-FLOTAC vs 83.2% for McMaster grids and 63.8% for McMaster chambers) and a lower coefficient of variation (10.0% for Mini-FLOTAC vs 47.5% for McMaster grids and 69.4% for McMaster chambers) than McMaster. There was no significant difference in the recovery of GIN eggs between the two studies performed in Belgium and in Italy. Conclusions: The high GIN egg recovery rate detected by Mini-FLOTAC and the similar results obtained in Belgium and in Italy indicated that the diagnostic performance of a FEC technique was not dependent on the laboratory environment.

Prevalence and risk factors associated with cat parasites in Italy: a multicenter study

“…The Mini-FLOTAC technique [ 7 ] has been recently demonstrated to be a highly sensitive method for diagnosing parasitic infections of human and veterinary importance where larvae or ova of parasites are shed in the feces [ 8 – 11 ]. Moreover, the mini-FLOTAC technique in combination with Fill-FLOTAC has been shown to be user-friendly and safe, with a wide diagnostic range.…”

A Qualitative Market Analysis Applied to Mini-FLOTAC and Fill-FLOTAC for Diagnosis of Helminth Infections in Ruminants

“…For this reason, the Mini-FLOTAC and Fill-FLOTAC are able to reduce time and costs of analysis. Moreover, the Mini-FLOTAC technique when compared to other fecal flotation methods showed an overall higher specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, precision, reproducibility, and repeatability for FEC and FECRT of GIN in livestock (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)17). In addition, the Mini-FLOTAC and Fill-FLOTAC are user-friendly devices (i.e., no special equipment such as a centrifuge, or trained technicians are required), so they can be used directly by veterinarians or farmers in the field (pen-side use) (8).…”

“…The main competitor of the Mini-FLOTAC technique in many countries is the McMaster method. However, different comparison studies performed between these two techniques showed that Mini-FLOTAC method is more sensitive, precise and accurate for the FEC and FECRT in livestock (9,(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)17). In UK there are also other competing methods commercially available, the FECPAK and FECPAK G2 , providing specific features such as pen-side digital data recording avoiding the requirement of a laboratory or specific technical skills.…”

“…Mini-FLOTAC and Fill-FLOTAC, developed by the Unit of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases of the Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production (University of Naples Federico II), are easy-to-use devices, used in combination to perform the Mini-FLOTAC technique, a multivalent, sensitive, accurate, precise, and reproducible copromicroscopic method (8). Because of these characteristics, these tools have increasingly been employed in FEC and FECRT surveys (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). The Mini-FLOTAC is a self-contained device for viewing and counting helminth eggs per gram of feces, under the microscope, after preparation from fecal samples, using the Fill-FLOTAC device (8).…”

Comparison between methods for measuring fecal egg count and estimating genetic parameters for gastrointestinal parasite resistance traits in sheep

“…The Modified McMaster method is the most common method used to quantify the GIN infection in sheep, which uses a two-chamber slide to count the eggs per gram and can detect as low as 50 eggs/g. However, this methodology has been shown to have lower sensitivity than Mini-FLOTAV for FEC lower than <500 eggs/g ( Amadesi et al, 2020 ). On the other hand, the Triple Chamber McMaster method uses three-chamber slide to count the eggs per gram and can detect as low as 8 eggs/g.…”