Níveis de anticorpos contra o vírus da cinomose canina e o parvovírus canino em cães não vacinados e vacinados

Public survey of knowledge concerning canine distemper and protective measures

“…Of these owners, 50% (25/50) had their dog undergo drug treatment, 38% (19/50) had their dog euthanized, 4% (2/50) did not take their dog to the vet, and 8% (4/50) did not remember what was done. The cost of therapy associated with clinical distemper in Brazil was estimated to be between R$ 258.3 million/annum (USD 147.6 million/annum) and R$ 280.5 million/annum (USD 160.3 million/annum) (Headley et al, 2012). The age range of the affected animals was 1 month to 12 months and was consistent with the results observed by others (Headley e Graça, 2000; Sonne et al, 2009).…”

“…The prevalence of distemper in Brazil has been described as ranging from 7.1 to 58.3% (Hass et al, 2008;Sonne et al, 2009). In an epidemiological study on the life expectancy of pet dogs, we demonstrated that infectious diseases -especially distemper -are the main causes of early death in dogs (Bentubo et al, 2007).…”

Epidemiological features and the neuropathological manifestations of canine distemper virus-induced infections in Brazil: a review

“…Retrospective studies using archival records of dogs submitted for routine necropsy have demonstrated CDV prevalence indices of 7.1% in Porto Alegre/RS (SONNE et al, 2009), with 11.7% (HEADLEY;GRAÇA, 2000), 12% (SILVA et al, 2007) and 12.4% (FIGHERA et al, 2008) (GUEDES et al, 2010), and 58.3% in Pelotas/RS (HASS et al, 2008). This comparatively elevated prevalence indices of live dogs demonstrating positive seroreactivity to CDV in several Brazilian cities relative to those submitted for necropsy at Regional Reference Institutions, might suggest that the actual incidence of CDV is more elevated than that described in retrospective studies.…”

“…Additionally, the roaming habit of mongrels was associated with contamination by Dioctophyma renale in dogs from Londrina/PR (NAKAGAWA et al, 2007), concomitant infections of CDV, Toxoplasma gondii, and ehrlichiosis in dogs from Botucatu/SP (MORETTI et al, 2006), dual infections of CDV and T. gondii also in Botucatu/ SP (MORETTI et al, 2002), secondary Bordetella bronchiseptica purulent bronchopneumonia in two pups (HEADLEY et al, 1999), and in five cases of Nocardia asteroides infection in Sudan (FAWI; TAG EL DIN; EL-SANOUSI, 1971). A seroepidemiological survey realized in Pelotas/RS demonstrated that 68% of dogs positive for CDV had access to the street and 58% of all positive dogs were mongrels (HASS et al, 2008). The spillover effect as occurred in the USA (DASZAK; CUNNINGHAM; HYATT, 2000), was attributed to the dissemination of canine parvovirus, canine adenovirus, and canine coronavirus infections between infected mongrels and susceptible wild canids native to the Serra do Cipó National Park/MG (CURI et al, 2010), and to CDV-induced disease in large felids residing in State Parks of Mato Grosso do Sul (NAVA et al, 2008).…”

“…Epidemiological and/or prevalence studies realized in Brazil have demonstrated no difference relative to the possibility of infection occurring between male and female dogs (HEADLEY;GRAÇA 2000;BORBA et al, 2002;DEZENGRINI;WEIBLEN;FLORES, 2007;HASS et al, 2008;GUEDES et al, 2010). However, in some studies, proportionally more males relative to females were infected by CDV.…”