Parasitic zoonoses associated with dogs and cats: a survey of Portuguese pet owners' awareness and deworming practices.

BACKGROUND: Parasitic diseases of companion animals comprise a group of globally distributed and rapidly spreading illnesses that are caused by a wide range of arthropods, helminths and protozoa. In addition to their veterinary importance, many of these parasites can also affect the human population, due to their zoonotic potential. The aim of the present work was to evaluate the knowledge of Portuguese pet owners regarding the zoonotic potential of parasites that dogs and cats can harbour, most common drugs, frequency of use and reasons for endo- and ectoparasite control. METHODS: Seventy hundred and fifty multiple-choice questionnaires designed to obtain data knowledge about the meaning of zoonosis, knowledge about parasitic diseases and perception regarding their zoonotic potential, as well as the drugs, frequency and reason for deworming their animals were delivered to dog and/or cat owners from non-rural (i.e. urban or semi-urban) and rural parishes who attended veterinary medical centres from continental Portugal. RESULTS: A total of 536 (71.5 %) questionnaires were retrieved. Two hundred and ninety five (56.5 %) responders had heard of zoonosis/zoonoses, but only 184 (35.2 %) knew their meaning. Tick fever, mange, leishmaniosis and ascaridiosis/roundworms were the parasitic diseases from pets most frequently identified. The number of owners who recognized the different parasitoses, who stated to have heard about zoonoses and who were aware of the potential transmission of parasites from animals to humans was significantly higher in those with intermediate (i.e. ≥9 and ≤ 12 years of schooling) and/or higher academic degree (i.e. licentiate, master's and/or doctorate degrees). The combinations of febantel-pyrantel-praziquantel (23.5 %) and milbemycin-praziquantel (34.5 %) were the most widely endoparasitic drugs used in dogs and in cats, respectively. The most common ectoparasiticide used in dogs was a combination of imidacloprid-permethrin (33.4 %), while in cats it was imidacloprid (26.3 %) followed by fipronil (25.4 %). The most used treatment schedule against internal and external parasites in dogs and cats was an administration every three months and the main reason to do it was as a prophylactic purpose. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Portuguese owners that attended veterinarian clinics use endoparasiticides and ectoparasiticides in/on their pets as a prophylactic measure, although in many cases not in the correct schedule of treatment. In addition, most of them are not aware of the possible transmission of parasites from their dogs and cats to themselves, a fact which highlights the important role of veterinarians in the continuous implementation of effective control measures to reduce the risk of parasitic infections in both humans and companion animals.

Ocular thelaziosis due to Thelazia callipaeda in a cat from northeastern Portugal.

Cases of feline thelaziosis have seldom been published in the scientific literature. We report the first autochthonous case of feline ocular thelaziosis in Portugal caused by Thelazia callipaeda and suggest that this infestation should be included among differential diagnoses of ocular diseases in cats from this country.

First report of canine ocular thelaziosis by Thelazia callipaeda in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Thelazia callipaeda eyeworms are transmitted by the non-biting insect vector Phortica variegata in Europe and infest the conjunctiva(s) of several mammalians, including dogs and humans. Infested hosts might remain asymptomatic or display clinical manifestations characterized by variable degrees of severity. METHODS: From July to November 2011, nine dogs were detected with eyeworms at two veterinary clinics in Chaves and Bragança (North of Portugal). Nematodes collected from dogs were morphologically and molecularly characterized at species level. RESULTS: Nematodes were identified as T. callipaeda. The number of worms collected from each dog ranged from three to 76 (average = 17.9 ± 26.8) and was not associated with the severity of clinical signs. Ocular discharge and conjunctivitis were observed in all dogs and ocular pruritus occurred in six of them. Polymerase chain reaction and sequencing of a portion of target cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene further identified all nematodes as haplotype 1. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of T. callipaeda and associated ocular disease in dogs from Portugal, suggesting that thelaziosis should be included in the differential diagnosis of canine ocular affections. The risk of the infestation spreading from Spain and France to Portugal, through domestic dogs or wild mammals, is realistic.

Canine babesiosis in northern Portugal and molecular characterization of vector-borne co-infections.

BACKGROUND: Protozoa and bacteria transmitted by arthropods, including ticks and phlebotomine sand flies, may cause a wide range of canine vector-borne diseases. Dogs can be simultaneously or sequentially infected with multiple pathogens. Canine babesiosis caused by Babesia canis canis and Babesia canis vogeli is known to occur in Portugal. This study assessed, by means of blood smear examination, PCR and DNA nucleotide sequencing, the presence of Babesia spp. and co-infecting agents Leishmania, Anaplasma/Ehrlichia and Hepatozoon in 45 dogs from northern Portugal clinically suspected of babesiosis. RESULTS: Forty-four dogs (98%) had infection with B. canis canis and one with B. canis vogeli. Co-infections were detected in nine animals (20%). Eight dogs were found infected with two vector-borne agents: six with B. canis canis and Leishmania infantum; one with B. canis canis and Ehrlichia canis; and one with B. canis canis and Hepatozoon canis. Another dog was infected with three vector-borne pathogens: B. canis vogeli, E. canis and L. infantum. Overall, L. infantum was found in seven (16%), E. canis in two (4%), and H. canis in one (2%) out of the 45 dogs with babesiosis. Almost 90% of the 45 cases of canine babesiosis were diagnosed in the colder months of October (18%), November (27%), December (20%), February (13%) and March (9%). Co-infections were detected in February, March, April, May, October and November. Twenty-two (50%) out of 44 dogs infected with B. canis were found infested by ticks including Dermacentor spp., Ixodes spp. and Rhipicephalus sanguineus. Mortality (9%) included two co-infected dogs that died spontaneously and two with single infections that were euthanized. CONCLUSIONS: Babesia canis canis is the main etiological agent of canine babesiosis in northern Portugal. A higher sensitivity of Babesia spp. detection was obtained with PCR assays, compared to the observation of blood smears. Twenty percent of the dogs were co-infected with L. infantum, E. canis or H. canis. Furthermore, this is the first molecular identification of H. canis in dogs from northern Portugal.