Reduction rate of animal products caused by hydatidosis [18].
Abstract
Dogs are involved in the transmission of several parasitic zoonosis. Among these, hydatidosis is very endemic in many countries of the world. Dog populations are very variable from one region to another, which increases the infestation risks across human populations especially in the developing countries such as in Morocco. Moreover, the risk of exposure is higher in dogs with access to rural slaughterhouses than in owned dogs. As for preventive measures, this calls for effective implementation of the appropriate dogs’ treatment against hydatidosis. Thus, the following chapter updates the most relevant information on the impact of hydatidosis upon human populations and livestock animals, as to stretch understanding on the vector contribution of dogs.
Keywords
- Dogs
- Morocco
- hydatidosis
- zoonotic diseases
- echinococcus granulosus
1. Introduction
Dog-borne zoonotic diseases include all the infectious diseases targeting dogs that can be transmitted to humans. Though they present major zoonosis causing a heavy burden upon the human population worldwide, these diseases are mostly neglected as few insufficient scientific research efforts are realized to face it (WHO, 2007b). Several examples of zoonosis are present with high prevalence up to time, such as bovine tuberculosis, brucellosis, cystic echinococcosis, visceral leishmaniosis, rabies [1], especially in the developing and North African countries in the poorest and most marginalized regions, in rural areas. Some of these diseases share the same definitive host represented by the dog. Especially hydatid cyst disease, which is endemic to hyper-endemic in agricultural countries in Europe, North, East and South Africa, South and North America, the Middle East and Asia [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. Morocco is one of these highly endemic countries [7, 8].
The hydatid cyst, or
Hence, the purpose of this chapter is to compile recent data regarding the identification of the main source of infestation in dogs and the determination of the prevalence of infestation. As the canine population varies considerably from one region to another, like everywhere else in the world, in Morocco there are approximately 18,000 owned dogs and 3,000 stray dogs in endemic areas. A high prevalence of
2. Dogs vector of the major zoonotic diseases: an overview on Echinococcus granulosus
The dog has a high importance in the social life of the human population. These multiple and diverse functions make it an indispensable domestic animal, particularly for households in rural areas where the relationship between dogs and humans is very close. Unfortunately, the risk of transmission of pathogenic agents from dogs to other animals, mainly mammals, is an issue of major concern. Dogs indeed can act as reservoirs of pathogens as they may transmit
Echinococcosis, the
3. Impact of hydatidosis disease upon human’s population and livestock animals production
Eggs of the
The abundance of stray dogs and slaughter practices that allow dogs’ access to condemned offal, particularly in rural areas, contribute to the persistence of hydatidosis. Hydatidosis is a serious public health problem and has a significant socio-economic impact. The
In humans, hydatid cyst is the cause of significant morbidity and mortality worldwide and is responsible for a significant economic loss in the public health sector [16, 17]. Hydatid cyst has several consequences, including the direct costs of diagnosis, hospitalization, surgical treatment, post-surgical care, for the patient and family members, without forgetting the indirect losses of mortality, pain and social consequences of lost working days and the cessation of agricultural activities by those affected or at risk [16, 17, 18]. People with hydatid cysts never restore a perfect health condition even after they have recovered [4].
At the livestock animal level, it involves losses in production, and their importance varies according to the breed and type of production concerned [19]:
Organs not usable and seized at the slaughterhouse, especially liver and lung;
Cost of destruction of infected viscera and dead animals;
Possible restriction on the export of animals and their products;
Parasitic hydatid cachexia associated with poly-parasitism in animals, which is a reason for reforming adult sheep whose productive life is reduced;
Brutal mortality following the rupture of a hydatid cyst.
In sheep farming, it is estimated that 7–10% of milk losses, 5–20% of meat or whole carcass weight losses, and 10–40% of wool losses occurred ( Table 1 ) [18]. In 1980, an assessment carried out in Italy [6] showed a 10% reduction in the commercial value of an infected sheep, a percentage which takes into account the cost of destroying viscera. It should be noted that the economic impact of infected viscera depends on the country’s regulations and the number of animals slaughtered under veterinary control, as well as the cost of the equipment used [19]. According to a recent study by Saadi et al., the economic impact of hydatidosis on animal production in Morocco is very significant [17].
4. Incrimination of dogs in transmissions of hydatidosis
4.1 Dogs infestation
In canids, particularly in dogs, infestation occurs by ingestion of intermediate host organs harboring the parasite at the larval stage (hydatid cyst). The protoscolexes released from the hydatid cyst grow into adult worms and live in the small intestine, particularly in the duodenum. The eggs are eliminated in the external environment by detaching the last proglottis from the mature worm and excreting it in the feces. In passage, some proglottis, which have been ruptured, release eggs at the marginal part of the anus. Anal pruritus provokes a licking reflex in the dog, which allows the dog to recover numerous eggs that will be found in the lingual papillae and the oral cavity and then, by licking, in the dog’s pelage.
4.2 Relationship between dogs, human and livestock animals infestation
In Morocco, current evidence indicates that the transmission cycle of
However, the abundance of dogs, especially stray dogs that eat infested offal in slaughterhouses and clandestine slaughter practices but also on farms that allow owned and sometimes stray dogs to feed on condemned offal, especially in rural areas, contribute to the persistence of hydatidosis. This represents a serious public health problem and has a significant socio-economic impact. The
Thus, one of the interesting models that reveals great relevance on the burden of
5. Categories of dogs’ population in Morocco
In Morocco, the dog population is very diversified by the presence of different types of dogs: owned dogs and stray dogs or semi stray dogs. A study carried out in three regions of Morocco revealed that stray dogs were the most infested category by
6. Diagnostics of echinococcosis in dogs
6.1 Clinical diagnosis
The identification of dogs infested with
Methods | Sensitivity % | Specificity % |
---|---|---|
|
> 90 | 100 |
|
50–70 | 100 |
|
35–70 | > 90 |
|
75–80 | > 95 |
6.2 Parasitological diagnosis
The diagnosis of cystic echinococcosis in ante-mortem dogs can be made using several techniques:
6.2.1 Coproscopy
Coproscopy consists of looking for the eggs or proglottis of the adult worm in the feces of the final host. Eggs can be detected in fecal samples by the flotation technique or on the perianal skin by attaching a transparent adhesive paper to the skin and examining it under a magnifying glass under a microscope. However, this microscopic detection of
6.2.2 Arecoline purging
Arecoline purging is the standard diagnostic method used for years in the detection of
The advantage of this technique is the high specificity, which can reach 100%. On the other hand, the sensitivity does not even reach 50% if it is only used once. This test is contraindicated in pregnant dogs, older dogs and puppies. Arecoline should be administered orally at a dose of 4 mg/kg BW. This dose should be carefully calculated since severe undesirable secondary effects may occur [7].
6.2.3 Necropsy diagnosis: Sedimentation and counting
After cutting the intestine into several sections, these must be placed in metal trays, opened with scissors and finally immersed in physiological saline solution. The worms adhering to the mucous membrane are then counted using a magnifying glass or binocular microscope. The disadvantage of this method is that small worms can escape detection [9].
6.3 Immunological diagnosis by detection of coproantigens
This technique consists of searching for one of two types of antigens, either antigens extracted raw somatically from the worm or excretory-secretory antigens from the protoscolex in the feces of the host using double sandwich ELISA kits [26].
Positive ELISA results can be collected even in the prepatent period, starting on day 5 post-infestation. The values begin to decrease to negative values 2–4 days after the elimination of
Fecal samples can be taken directly from the ground or rectum and can be kept cold (−20°C) for up to 6 months. The test can be used for the identification of infected cases in control program, including pregnant dogs, older dogs and puppies. Three ELISA kits are commercially available today [27].
6.3.1 Serum antibody detection
Specific serum antibodies (IgG, IgA and IgE) can be detected in the serum of dogs infected with
The ELISA kits available have low sensitivity and highly variable specificity. However, a new kit using a newly derived recombinant antigen from the protoscolex showed 100% specificity, but the sensitivity is not comparable to that of older kits. The use of ELISA kits for the detection of serum antibodies is still questionable because of their low sensitivity, the persistence of antibodies in serum after worm removal and the lack of correlation with infestation pressure [12, 26, 27].
If a seropositive test has been detected but the result is negative for the coproantigens, this is an indication of possible recent exposure [28].
6.4 Molecular biology diagnosis
Parasite DNA can be obtained from eggs, proglottis or worm cells and can be detected in feces after PCR amplification. However, no copro-PCR is currently available for the detection of all strains of
7. Treatment of infected dogs
Praziquantel is the only drug without significant undesirable effects known to be effective against
8. Prevention
Regular and accentuated treatment of stray dogs is necessary. However, regular treatment of owned dogs with Praziquantel should be an obligation in highly endemic areas, as treatment of dogs remains the most effective measure of prevention [7].
Vaccination of dogs with two recombinant proteins, EgA31 isolated from the adult worm and oncosphere and EgTrop isolated from protoscolex, is a promising approach to limiting the development of the
9. Conclusion
In the case of zoonotic diseases, preventive veterinary treatments allow the protection of the public and animal health, but also the reduction of the risk of their transmission to humans, as is the case for cystic echinococcosis. To be effective, these treatments must be applied regularly. Thus, facility of access to them must be taken into account when developing the canine population management program. However, it should be noted that it is not only the dog that needs to be controlled, but also the intermediate host, and efforts should be made to eliminate the parasite or pathogen in general from the intermediate host that represents the main source of transmission to the dog to allow the pathogen to complete its life cycle and become infectious. Therefore the need for an integrated approach (action on the different hosts involved in the life cycle of the pathogen and the involvement of the socio-economic factor in control programs including stakeholders) to control these zoonosis is strongly advised.
References
- 1.
El Berbri I, Ducrotoy MJ, Petavy AF, Fassifihri O, Shaw AP, Bouslikhane M, et al. Knowledge, attitudes and practices with regard to the presence, transmission, impact, and control of cystic echinococcosis in Sidi Kacem Province, Morocco. Infect Dis Poverty. 2015;4: 1-12. doi:10.1186/s40249-015-0082-9 - 2.
Matossian RM, Rickard MD, Smyth JD. Hydatidosis: a global problem of increasing importance. Bull World Health Organ. 1977;55: 499-507 - 3.
Wen H, Yang WG. Public health importance of cystic echinococcosis in China. Acta Trop. 1997;67: 133-145. doi:10.1016/S0001-706X(97)00051-X - 4.
Torgerson PR, Heath DD. Transmission dynamics and control options for Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology. 2003;127. doi:10.1017/S0031182003003810 - 5.
Budke CM, Campos-Ponce M, Qian W, Torgerson PR. A canine purgation study and risk factor analysis for echinococcosis in a high endemic region of the Tibetan plateau. Vet Parasitol. 2005;127: 43-49. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2004.08.024 - 6.
Dakkak A. Echinococcosis/hydatidosis: A severe threat in Mediterranean countries. Vet Parasitol. 2010;174: 2-11. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.08.009 - 7.
Amarir FE, Saadi A, Marcotty T, Rhalem A, Oukessou M, Sahibi H, et al. Cystic echinococcosis in three locations in the Middle Atlas, Morocco: Estimation of the infection rate in the dog reservoir. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2020;20: 436-443. doi:10.1089/vbz.2019.2538 - 8.
Thys S, Sahibi H, Gabriël S, Rahali T, Lefèvre P, Rhalem A, et al. Community perception and knowledge of cystic echinococcosis in the High Atlas Mountains, Morocco. BMC Public Health. 2019;19: 1-15. doi:10.1186/s12889-018-6372-y - 9.
Eckert J, Conraths FJ, Tackmann K. Echinococcosis: An emerging or re-emerging zoonosis? Int J Parasitol. 2000;30: 1283-1294. doi:10.1016/S0020-7519(00)00130-2 - 10.
Santé MDELA, Santé S De. d’ Epidémiologie d’ Intervention - 11.
Cabrera PA, Lloyd S, Haran G, Pineyro L, Parietti S, Gemmell MA, et al. Control of Echinococcus granulosus in Uruguay: Evaluation of different treatment intervals for dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2002;103: 333-340. doi:10.1016/S0304-4017(01)00603-3 - 12.
Craig PS, Gasser RB, Parada L, Cabrera P, Parietti S, Borgues C, et al. Diagnosis of canine echinococcosis: comparison of coproantigen and serum antibody tests with arecoline purgation in Uruguay. Vet Parasitol. 1995;56: 293-301. doi:10.1016/0304-4017(94)00680-B - 13.
Campos-Bueno A, Lopez-Abente G, Andres-Cercadillo AM. Risk factors for Echinococcus granulosus infection: A case-control study. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2000;62: 329-334. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.2000.62.329 - 14.
Veterinaire D. La Lutte Contre L ’ Hydatidose En Sardaigne. 2009 - 15.
Otero-Abad B, Torgerson PR. A Systematic Review of the Epidemiology of Echinococcosis in Domestic and Wild Animals. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0002249 - 16.
Craig PS, Larrieu E. Control of Cystic Echinococcosis/Hydatidosis: 1863-2002. Adv Parasitol. 2006;61: 443-508. doi:10.1016/S0065-308X(05)61011-1 - 17.
Saadi A, Amarir F, Filali H, Thys S, Rhalem A, Kirschvink N, et al. The socio-economic burden of cystic echinococcosis in morocco: A combination of estimation method. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14: 1-20. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0008410 - 18.
Battelli G. Echinococcosis: Costs, losses and social consequences of a neglected zoonosis. Vet Res Commun. 2009;33: 47-52. doi:10.1007/s11259-009-9247-y - 19.
Battelli G. Socio-economic impact of cystic echinococcosis and of its control: Some data and considerations. Parassitologia. 2004;46: 359-362 - 20.
Benner C, Carabin H, Sánchez-Serrano LP, Budke CM, Carmena D. Analysis of the economic impact of cystic echinococcosis in Spain. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88: 49-57. doi:10.2471/BLT.09.066795 - 21.
Azlaf R, Dakkak A. Epidemiological study of the cystic echinococcosis in Morocco. Vet Parasitol. 2006;137: 83-93. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.01.003 - 22.
Chebli H, Laamrani El Idrissi A, Benazzouz M, Lmimouni BE, Nhammi H, Elabandouni M, et al. Human cystic echinococcosis in Morocco: Ultrasound screening in the Mid Atlas through an Italian-Moroccan partnership. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11: 1-20. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005384 - 23.
Maghnouj M. Quelques espèces de mammifères de la cédraie au Maroc : cas du singe magot. Forêt Méditerranéenne. 1999;20: 101-106 - 24.
El Berbri I, Petavy AF, Umhang G, Bouslikhane M, Fassi Fihri O, Boué F, et al. Epidemiological Investigations on Cystic Echinococcosis in North-West (Sidi Kacem Province) Morocco: Infection in Ruminants. Adv Epidemiol. 2015;2015: 1-9. doi:10.1155/2015/104025 - 25.
Economides P, Christofi G, Gemmell MA. Control of Echinococcus granulosus in Cyprus and comparison with other island models. Vet Parasitol. 1998;79: 151-163. doi:10.1016/S0304-4017(98)00163-0 - 26.
Eckert J, Gemmell M, Meslin F-X, Z.S P. WHO/OIE Manual on Echinococcosis in Humans and Animals: A Public Health Problem of Global Concern. Veterinary Parasitology. 2002. doi:10.1016/s0304-4017(01)00631-8 - 27.
Zhang W, Li J, McManus DP. Concepts in Immunology and Diagnosis of Hydatid Disease. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003;16: 18-36. doi:10.1128/CMR.16.1.18-36.2003 - 28.
Zeyhle E, Zhou P, Rogan M, Stringer R. Coproantigen detection for immunodiagnosis of echinococcosis and taeniasis in dogs and humans. Parasitology. 1992;104: 347-355. doi:10.1017/S0031182000061801 - 29.
Mathis A, Deplazes P. Copro-DNA tests for diagnosis of animal taeniid cestodes. Parasitol Int. 2006;55. doi:10.1016/j.parint.2005.11.012 - 30.
Farias LN, Malgor R, Cassaravilla C, Bragança C, De La Rue ML. Echinococcosis in Southern Brazil: Efforts toward implementation of a control program in Santana do Livramento, Rio Grande do Sul. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2004;46: 153-156. doi:10.1590/s0036-46652004000300006 - 31.
Larrieu E, Zanini F. Critical analysis of cystic echinococcosis control programs and praziquantel use in South America, 1974-2010. Rev Panam Salud Publica/Pan Am J Public Heal. 2012;31: 81-87. doi:10.1590/S1020-49892012000100012 - 32.
Chemotherapie I, Ag B, Wuppertal D-. Parasitenkunde. 1978;179: 165-179 - 33.
Lahmar PS. Travail sur Echinococcus en Tunisie. 2011; 4-6