COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF COMMERCIAL SERODIAGNOSTIC TESTS FOR THE SEROPREVALENCE STUDY OF BRUCELLOSIS IN STRAY DOGS IN BANGLADESH

Abstract

A prospective study of Brucella sero-prevalence was conducted in 30 stray dogs in Mymensingh Municipal Corporation area of Bangladesh during the period from January to December 2009. All the sera were screened primarily by Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT). Positive, doubtful and negative serum samples were further confirmed with Slow Agglutination Test (SAT), Standard Tube Agglutination Test (STAT) and indirect Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and all the SAT, STAT and ELISA negative samples were confirmed as negative. The sensitivity of RBPT, SAT and STAT was found to be of 100%, 66.67% and 66.67% with considering ELISA as a standard test while specificity was found to be of 96.29%, 100% and 100% in stray dogs. This indicates that the SAT and STAT are found more specific than RBPT. Evaluation of comparison of sero-prevalence rates of canine brucellosis with the four sero-tests advocated to use ELISA for diagnosis of canine brucellosis. The overall sero-prevalence of canine brucellosis was recorded as 13.33%, 6.67%, 6.67% and 10.0% with RBPT, SAT, STAT and ELISA, respectively. Sero-results have analyzed on the basis of two age groups (up to 6 months and 7 to 36 months) and sex (male and female). Significantly (p<0.01) higher sero-prevalence rate of canine brucellosis was recorded in stray dogs aged between 7 to 36 months (14.81%, 7.40%, 7.40% and 11.11%) in comparison to aged group up to 6 months ( 0%, 0%, 0% and 0% ) with RBPT, SAT, STAT and ELISA, respectively. The sero-prevalence rate of canine brucellosis was found significantly (p <0.01) higher in female dogs (15.78%, 10.52%, 10.52% and 15.78%) in comparison to male (9.09%, 0%, 0% and 0%) with RBPT, SAT, STAT and ELISA, respectively. It appears from this study that brucellosis is an endemic disease and measures are needed to reduce this high prevalence of canine brucellosis in Bangladesh.

DOI = http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bjvm.v9i1.11217

Bangl. J. Vet. Med. (2011). 9(1): 79-83