B.suis, you say? Why do I need t know about a swine variant of Brucella?? Did you know that B. suis can be pathologic in dogs, as well as swine, and is also zoonotic? You're welcome :)

A recently published article detailed the clinical signs, blood work, imaging (when available), serologic progression over time, and body fluid levels of organism over an 18 month period in 27 dogs from 17 households. The study population was located in Australia where naturally occurring B. canis is not found. Exposure to feral pigs was considered an important source of disease acquisition and may be a stand alone reason to test. (1 in 10 pigs are positive in Australia.) Although B. suis is not as commonly noted in our US canine population, we are a global veterinary profession now with lots of dogs traveling or being adopted from international locations. I felt this article was a nice reminder that B. suis exists, and is pathologic in dogs as well as having zoonotic potential, like B. canis.

Clinical Signs of B. suis

Ten dogs had clinical signs attributed to brucellosis. Clinical signs included pyrexia with orchitis and epididymitits (4/10), lymphadenopathy (1/10), spinal pain (3/10), abortion or dystocia ( 1/10), and athritis (2/10). The remaining 17 dogs were assymptomatic throughout the entire 18 month period!

Serology and PCR

Titers did not correlate with severity of signs. Postive results were deemed positive if a Rose Bengal rapid plate test (RBRPT) yielded a positive result along with a complement fixation test (CFT) greater than or equal to 8. Only 2 dogs had seronegative results after 18 months and both had low baseline serology. Brucella DNA was not detected by PCR in blood, urine, saliva or preputial swabs in any dog at any time in the study. Notably, they weren't swabbed weekly or daily, so it is possible that some shedding occurred without detection on the sporadic testing. Only 3 positive PCR tests were found and this occurred in 1 bitch post whelping (vaginal fluid), as well as milk at 3 and 7 weeks post whelping as well as a lymph node at necropsy on a puppy that died. Although culture may be the gold standard diagnostic test for some countries, the RBRPT and CFT were considered safter to personnel performing the test and were preferred in this study.

Diagnostic Imaging Results

Fifteen dogs had some sort of radiograph taken during the study period. Two of 15 had joint siease, 3/15 had vertebral lesions and 2 of 15 had lymphadenopathy. The dogs with radiographic changes had spondylosis, which we know can be a normal finding, therefore I question the inclusion of this as a clinical sign of brucellosis.

Treatment Response

Six dogs were treated with doxycycline and rifampicin (one dog relapsed and was treated twice. It was generally well tolerated with one case of marked hepatitis. There is no standardized treatment for brucella and many dogs are considered to harbor the bacteria long-term, with or without clinical signs, with intermittent bacteremia. The zoonotic risk to humans, therefore remains present with dogs with a current or historic positive Brucella test. Euthanasia is the recommended treatment for positive livestock, however this causes emotional conflict for veterinarians and owners of companion animals. Check with your local veterinary health directors to determine the legal requirements in your state or country. This is a reportable disease in the USA.

If you'd like to read more about this study you can find it here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jvim.16678

In honor of Memorial Day yesterday, I wish to thank all of you that have served or have friends or family members that have been lost during military service. We honor you!

Have a wonderful week! My schedule has changed for summer so please reach out if you cannot find a suitable time for a consult online - I may have additional flexibility that isn't listed.