Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409631›Full record

ArticleParasitology research2021

Different epidemiological pattern of canine dirofilariosis in two neighboring countries in Central Europe-the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Miterpáková Martina, Hurníková Zuzana, Valentová Daniela, Borková Lenka

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Parasitology research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Infectious disease reports · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Miterpáková MartinaInstitute of Parasitology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Hlinkova 3, 040 01, Košice, Slovakia. miterpak@saske.sk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3742-948X
Hurníková ZuzanaInstitute of Parasitology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Hlinkova 3, 040 01, Košice, Slovakia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6816-2992
Valentová DanielaVeterinary and Food Institute, Botanická 15, 842 52, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Borková LenkaInstitute of Parasitology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Hlinkova 3, 040 01, Košice, Slovakia.
Slovak Academy of Sciences · SKFood Research Institute · SK

Funding

Agentúra na Podporu Výskumu a Vývoja APVV-15-0114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The known data resulting from individual surveys of canine dirofilariosis point to the great differences in the epidemiological situation among countries where Dirofilaria parasites emerged approximately at the same time. In this regard, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, neighboring countries situated in Central Europe, could serve as an illustrative example of such a situation. The present study aimed to assess the prevalence of canine dirofilariosis in both countries and to discuss the reasons for potential differences shown. Between October and December 2019, 429 dogs from the Czech Republic and 644 from Slovakia were examined for canine dirofilariosis using the Knott test for microfilariae detection and conventional PCR for the species determination. The results' analyses showed notable differences. While in the Czech Republic autochthonous Dirofilaria repens cases are reported sporadically and Dirofilaria immitis infections have been confirmed only as imported so far, in Slovakia, both Dirofilaria species seem to have become endemic. Concretely, in the Czech Republic, microfilariae were detected in the peripheral blood of 8 dogs (1.86%): in seven, D. repens was confirmed, and in one dog, mixed infection with D. repens and D. immitis was diagnosed. Seven infected animals came from the eastern part of the country neighboring Slovakia. In Slovakia, microfilariae were detected in 68 (10.56%) dogs examined. DNA analysis confirmed D. repens mono-infection in 38 (5.90%) dogs, single D. immitis infection in 21 (3.26%) animals, and both Dirofilaria species were detected in 9 (1.40%) samples. Although we are unable to determine the cause of the differences, our study confirmed that the long-registered low number of canine dirofilariosis cases in the Czech Republic is not due to insufficient investigation (monitoring), but due to a low prevalence of the parasite in this area.

Indexed as

AnimalsCoinfectionCzech RepublicDirofilaria immitisDirofilaria repensDirofilariasisDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMaleMicrofilariaePolymerase Chain ReactionPrevalenceSlovakiaCanine dirofilariosisCzech RepublicDirofilaria immitisDirofilaria repensSlovakia

Identifiers

PMID33409631
OpenAlexW3119393605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.