Köpek ve Kedilerde Kuduz Antikor Titre Tayininin Retrospektif Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, 2005-2010 yılları arasında Veteriner Kontrol Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü, Kuduz Teşhis Laboratuvarına kuduz antikor titre tesbiti için gönderilen köpek ve kedi orijinli kan serumları sonuçlarının değerlendirilmesi amacıyla yapılmıştır. Çoğunlukla Ege, Akdeniz ve Marmara bölgesi olmak üzere 24 farklı ilden gelen, toplam 8776 kan serumu çalışılmıştır. Fluorescent Antibody Virus Neutralisation (FAVN) testi kullanılarak, 8126 (%92.6) adet serum örneğinde, serum anti kuduz antikor varlığı istenilen düzeyde (≥0.5IU/ml) bulunmuştur. Yine 650 (%7.4) adet serum örneğinde ise anti kuduz antikorların varlığı istenilen düzeyin (<0.5 IU/ml ) altında bulunmuştur. Koruyuculuk kriteri olarak kabul edilen 0.5IU/ml sonuçlar; tür, yaş ve aşılama tarihleriyle ilişkili olarak yıllara göre değerlendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi
• Kedi
• Köpek
• Kuduz Antikor
• Retrospektif
• Nil ÜNAL
• Orhan AYLAN
• Hikmet ÜN
• Conrad FREULING
• Thomas MÜLLER
• 2012

Retrospective Evaluation of the Rabies Antibody Titre Determination in Dogs and Cats

Öz

This study was carried out in order to evaluate the analysis of blood serum samples with canine and feline origin sent to Rabies Diagnostic Laboratory at Central Veterinary Control and Research Institute in Ankara Turkey between 2005 and 2010. During this period of time, a total of 8776 units of blood serum using Fluorescent Antibody Virus Neutralisation (FAVN) test, from 2 provinces in mainly Aegean, Mediterranean and Marmara regions were examined. Often the Aegean, the Mediterranean and the Marmara region in 24 different provinces, including a total of 8776 blood serum were examined. In 8126 serum samples (wich makes 92.6% of the whole lot) the presence of rabies serum antibodies was found at the desired level meaning more than or equal with 0.5IU/ml.(≥ 0.5IU/ml). The rest 650 serums (which makes the 7.4% of the samples) contains rabies serum antibodies below the desired level which means less than 0.5IU/ml (<0.5 IU / ml). Results determined by 0.5IU/ml adopted criterion of protectiveness, were assessed in relation to age, species, and vaccination dates. 0.5IU/ml results adopted as a criterion of protectiveness, were evaluated in relation to the species, age and vaccination dates.

Kaynakça

1. Berndtsson TL, Nyman JAK, Rivera, E, Klingeborn B, (2011). Factors associated with the success of rabies vaccination of dogs in Sweden. Acta Vet Scand, 53, 1, 22.
2. Buxton A, Fraser G, (1977). Rhabdovirusses in Animal microbiology. Blackwell Scientific Publication, Edinburg, pp. 553-576.
3. CDC, (2011). Rabies. Erişim adresi : http: // www.cdc. gov / rabies / index .html. Erişim tarihi:10.01.2012.
4. Cliquet F, Aubert MFA, Sagné L, (1998). Development of a fluorescent antibody virus neutralizing test (FAVN test) for the quantitation of rabies-neutralising antibody. J Immunol Meth.,212,79-87.
5. Cliquet F, Verdier Y, Sagné L, Aubert M, Schereffer JL, Selve M, Wasniewski M, Servat A, (2003). Neutralising antibody titration in 25,000 sera of dogs and cats vaccinated against rabies in France, in the framework of the new regulations that offer an alternative to quarantine. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz. 22, 857-866.
6. Day MJ, (2007). Immune system development in the dog and cat. J Comp Path. 137, 10-15.
7. Day MJ, (2010). Ageing immunosenescence and inflammageing in the dog and cat. J Comp Path. 142, 60-69.
8. Gıllespıe JH, Timoney JF, (1981). Hagan and Bruneer’s infectious diseases of domestic animals. Seventh edition. Cornell University Press. p. 785-781.

9. Hogenesch H, Thompson S, (2010). Effect of ageing on the immune response of dogs to vaccines. J Comp Path.142,74- 77.
10. Jakel V, König M, Cussler K, Hanschmann K, Thiel HJ, (2008). Factors influencing the antibody response to vaccination against rabies. Dev Biol. 131, 431-436.
11. Kennedy LJ, Lunt M, Barnes A, McElhinney L, Fooks AR, Baxter DN, Ollier WER, (2007). Factors influencing the antibody response of dogs vaccinated against rabies. Vaccine. 25, 8500-8507.
12. King AA, Turner GS, (1993). Rabies: a review J Comp Path.180, 1-39.
13. Louie RE, Dobkin MB, Meyer P, Chin B, Roby RE, Hammar AH, Cabasso VS, (1975). Measurement of rabies antibody comparison of the Mouse Neutralization Test (MNT) with the Rapid Fluoresecent Focus Inhibition Test (RFFIT). J Biol Stand. 3,365-373.
14. Mansfield KL, Burr PD, Snodgrass DR, Sayers R, Fooks AR, (2004). Factors affecting the serological response of dogs and cats to rabies vaccination. Vet Rec. 154, 423-426.
15. Meslin FX, Kaplan MM, Koprowski H, (1996). The fluorescent antibody test. Fourth edition. Dean DJ, Abelseth MK, Atanasiu P. eds. Laboratory techniques in rabies WHO. Geneva. p.88-93
16. OIE, (2009). Manual of diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals rabies. Erişim adresi: http://web.oie. int/eng/normes/MMANUAL/2008/pdf/2.01.13_RABIES. Erişim Tarih: 09.01.2012.
17. Regulation (EC), (2003). No. 998/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals and amending Council Directive 92/65/EEC.
18. Sağlık Bakanlığı Temel Sağlık Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü sağlık istatistik yıllıkları, (2006). Çalışma yıllıkları. Erişim adresi: http : // www.sb.gov.tr / TR / belge /1-5250 / temel- saglik- hizmetleri- genel -mudurlugucalisma- yilligi- html. Erişim tarihi: 09.01.2012.
19. WHO, (2005). World Health Organization expert consultation on rabies. WHO Tech Rep Ser 931, Geneva.
20. Yousaf MZ, Qasim M , Zia S, Khan M R, Ashfaq AU, Khan1 S, (2012). Rabies molecular virology, diagnosis, prevention and treatment. Virol J. 9, 50. Erişim adresi: http://www.virologyj.com/content/9/1/50.