Zoonotic intestinal parasites of carnivores: A systematic review in Iran

Beyene

et al. 2019

Preprint

20 Background: Intestinal parasitic infection affects 3.5 billion people in the world and mostly 21 affecting the low socio-economic groups. The objectives of this research were to estimate the 22 prevalence and determinants of intestinal parasitic infection among family members of known 23 intestinal parasite infected patients. 24 Methods and materials: A comparative cross-sectional study design was implemented in the 25 urban and rural settings of mecha district. The data were collected from August 2017 to March 26 2019 from intestinal parasitic infected patient household members. Epi-info software was used to 27 calculate the sample size, 4531 household members were estimated to be included. Data were 28 collected using interview technique and colleting stool samples from each household contact of 29 intestinal parasite patients. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence of 30 intestinal parasites among known contacts of intestinal parasites patients/family members. 31 Binary logistic regression was used to identify the determinant factors of intestinal parasitic 32 infection among family members. 33 Results: The prevalence of intestinal parasite among household contacts of parasite-infected 34 family members was 86.14 % [95% CI: 86.14 % -87.15 %]. Hookworm parasitic infection was 35 the predominant type of infection (18.8%). Intestinal parasitic infection was associated with sex, 36 environmental sanitation, source of water, habit of playing with domestic animals, the presence 37 of chicken in the house, the presence of household water filtering materials, overcrowding, 38 personal hygiene, residence, and substandard house, role in the household, source of light for the 39 house, floor materials, trimmed fingernails, family size, regular hand washing practice, barefoot. 3 40 Conclusion: The prevalence of intestinal parasites was high among household contacts of 41 primary confirmed cases. 42 Key words: intestinal parasite, contact screening, secondary attack rate, household members. 43 Introduction 44 Intestinal parasites are groups of worm's primary affecting the gastrointestinal tracts broadly 45 contains flatworms (tapeworms and flukes) and roundworms( ascariasis, pinworm, and 46 hookworm infections)[1]. The mode of transmission includes ingestion of uncooked animal 47 products, consuming infected water, absorption through the skin and fecal-oral [2]. 48 Predominantly intestinal parasitic infection transmitted through feco-oral route [3]. That means 49 all family members living in intestinal positive patients at higher risk of acquiring the infection. 50 A patient infected with intestinal parasite manifests with abdominal cramp, vomiting, excessive 51 bowl sound, nausea, diarrhea, loss of appetite, malabsorption, skin itching [4]. Due to 52 unspecified symptoms, the diagnosis of intestinal parasitic infection usually performed by taking 53 stool samples and applying different laboratory techniques, concentration technique is more 54 valid than the other laboratory techniques [5]. 55 Intes...

“…This finding agrees with finding from Canada [27]. This is because most intestinal parasitic infections are zoonotic in nature [28].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 92%

Intestinal parasitic infection among household contacts of primary cases, a comparative cross-sectional study

Beyene

et al. 2019

Preprint

“…This finding agrees with finding from Canada [44]. This is because most protozoa infections are transmitted from animals to humans (zoonotic) [45].…”

Section: Intestinal Parasitic Infection Among Childrensupporting

confidence: 92%

Intestinal parasitic infection among household contacts of primary cases, a comparative cross-sectional study

Beyene

Feleke³

et al. 2019

PLoS ONE

Background Intestinal parasitic infection affects 3.5 billion people in the world and mostly affecting the low socioeconomic groups. The objectives of this research works were to estimate the prevalence and determinants of intestinal parasitic infection among family members of known intestinal parasite infected patients. Methods and materials A comparative cross-sectional study design was implemented in the urban and rural settings of Mecha district. The data were collected from August 2017toMarch 2019 from intestinal parasite infected patient household members. Epi-info software was used to calculate the sample size, 4531 household members were estimated to be included. Data were collected using interview technique, and collecting stool samples from each household contact of intestinal parasite patients. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence of intestinal parasites among known contacts of intestinal parasite patients/family members. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the determinant factors of intestinal parasitic infection among family members. Results The prevalence of intestinal parasite among household contacts of intestinal parasiteinfected family members was 86.14% [95% CI: 86.14%-87.15%]. Hookworm infection was the predominant type of infection (18.8%). Intestinal parasitic infection was associated with sex, environmental sanitation, overcrowding, personal hygiene, residence, substandard house, role in the household, source of light for the house, trimmed fingernails, family size, regular handwashing practice. Protozoa infection was associated with habit of ingesting raw vegetable, playing with domestic animals, water source and the presence of household water filtering materials.

“…Taenia hydatigena was the most represented tapeworm, with around 44% of the farms being positives. A quite recent systematic review focused on the zoonotic potential linked to parasites of carnivores in Iran (50), encompassing studies from 1997 to 2015, reported that T. hydatigena was the most frequently isolated parasite in dogs, with a prevalence of around 30% out of 1,539 examined dogs. Usually, T. hydatigena represents the most common taeniid species detected worldwide in both domestic (51) and wild environment (28), where the wolf act as the main definitive host (52).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Insights Into the Peculiar World of the Shepherd-Dog Parasites: An Overview From Maremma (Tuscany, Italy)

et al. 2020

Several developments have been recently achieved to understand pet-dog parasites and their relationship with hosts; however, parasites' presence and distribution in shepherd-dog have been mainly neglected; this knowledge gap is of critical sanitary importance, as shepherd-dogs could harbor zoonotic helminths including Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato. The related human disease, cystic echinococcosis, is a worldwide neglected disease, with high endemicity in the Mediterranean Basin. To evaluate the presence of E. granulosus and other parasites, a sheepdog population from the province of Grosseto (Tuscany, Italy) has been investigated. Overall, 648 dog fecal samples obtained from 50 modern sheep farms, having a total of 216 dogs, were collected. Specimens were analyzed using a standardized centrifugal flotation method (specific gravity = 1.3). Taeniid eggs detected were further isolated using a sieving/flotation technique. DNA was isolated from eggs for PCR and sequence analyses for species identification (gene target: 12S rRNA and nad1). Thirty-nine (78%) farms tested positive for at least one parasite species or genus. The most represented intestinal helminths were Toxocara spp. in 64% of farms, followed by Ancylostomatidae (58%), Trichuris vulpis (50%), Capillaria spp. (34%), and taeniids (32%). Sequence analyses confirmed the presence of Taenia hydatigena in seven farms, Taenia (syn. Multiceps) multiceps in five farms, and T. pisiformis in one farm. No DNA was extracted from four previously taeniid egg-positive farms. No amplification of amplicon corresponding to E. granulosus was achieved in the investigated farms. Although not entirely expected, Spearman's test showed a positive correlation between flock size and the number of dogs per farm (ρ = 0.588, P < 0.001). The quantitative analysis reported that the home slaughter practice was affected neither by the flock size nor by the number of dogs per farm. The probability to diagnose farms positive for taeniids had been increased by about 35% for each dog unit increase [odds ratio (OR) = 1.35, P = 0.012]. In conclusion, the wide distribution of T. hydatigena and T. multiceps detected in the present study clearly reveals that dogs have still access to raw offal, a major risk for the transmission of E. granulosus. Home slaughtering is an unavoidable practice, and more efforts must be undertaken by the public health system to prevent and control potential zoonotic taeniids.