BRUCELLOSIS, a test of faith
The evening I returned from a
business/hunting trip and catching a cold from the extremely cold weather,
I noticed a call from the veterinarian I used to pull all the Brucellosis
tests from my whole kennel. (I decided to dip real deep into my pockets
and get EVERYTHING BAER, CERF, and Brucellosis tested so the owner of any
bitch that was shipped in for breeding would feel totally comfortable with
my breeding operation.) The tests were drawn 4 days before, so I
was anxious to hear that the last of my inspections would give me a documented
CLEAN & HEALTHY kennel.
I called Dr. Ruth the next morning
and she was busy, so I left my name & phone number for her to call
me back. An hour later, I ran back into the house from the kennel
to answer the phone. "Cheryl, this is Dr. Ruth and I have some very
bad news for you." Tears started flowing from my eyes; my whole body
became numb; my legs collapsed as I dropped into a chair while Dr. Ruth
was explaining what was recommended I do with my 1 positive and 4 suspect
terriers.
I literally ran out to the kennel
in panic. I was separating dogs, hauling clorox to the pens and scrubbing
them down. My husband drove by and asked if I wanted to go
to dinner. I was in such shock and panic that I snapped in anger.
My son that hunts with me, came out and could tell I was literally crazy.
"Mom, what's wrong; please tell me? Is something wrong with Tracy?
Why is she at the barn?" I couldn't even speak.
Two more trips were made to
redraw blood. For 2 weeks I couldn't hardly speak to anyone.
I finally broke down and told my family. What I had worked so hard
for, what I had prayed for, what was my salvation from the horse fall that
ended my horse showing career, was being taken away from me too.
And above all, THE MOST CRUSHING THOUGHT was knowing that I had probably
whiped out the kennels of all my new found friends that had put their trust
in me to bring my dogs to their homes; who shared their hunting grounds
that was now contaminated! God only knows how tough it was on
me. My family thought they had lost me for good. Dr. Ruth had
told me that mistakes are made occasionally, that Brucellosis is not "Cut
& Dry" and that the more she was investigating into this disease, the
more she was finding out how little the veterinarians and universities
know about it.
I prayed, I cried, I asked God
"Why?" On Friday the 13th, I was at the kennel scrubbing floors when
I received a call from Dr. Ruth. "Cheryl, the test results were "ALL"
negative. I'm so sorry for the error in your original results".
I collapsed to my knees thanking God for his bountiful blessings.
The tears still flow even as I write this "faith testing" story on paper.
Friday the 13th, the supposedly unlucky day, I was also told that I had
been approved for my "A" working judges position. Ha, this is MY
lucky day!
This is a testimony for those
of you who have not tested your dogs; please do so, but if your results
don't come back negative the first time, don't panic until further tests
are done. The stress can be more than you can stand!
Cheryl Hart
December, 1996
Dr. Ruth Wilburn's response:
BRUCELLOSIS
by Dr. Ruth Wilburn
The thought of Brucellosis in
a breeding kennel is terrifying. As a veterinarian I have always
recommended to my breeders that they test their breeding dogs and require
a negative Brucellosis test for any dog brought into their kennel for breeding.
Any time I have encountered reproductive problems like abortions, low fertility,
etc., I have advised checking for Brucellosis.
This breeder decided to test
all of her kennel for Brucellosis as a matter of routine. No dogs
were showing or had shown any signs of illiness or reproductive problems
that would make us think that Brucellosis was a problem. I drew blood
on 13 dogs in her kennel. All dogs were 10 months old or older and
even included spayed or neutered dogs. The blood was sent to our
local veterinary lab who routinely sends these out to another lab.
There has been a problem with
the tests for Brucellosis recently. The only approved test for Brucellosis
was a rapid slide agglutination test manufactured by Pitman Moore (now
Mallinkrodt). This test could be easily run in the veterinarian's
office or any laboratory. However, this test not uncommonly produced
some false positive results. A second test, usually a tube agglutination
test, would be run to verify these results. Manufacture of this rapid slide
agglutination test has been discontinued for some time now. Any tests
for Brucellosis now have to be sent out to a lab that can do some other
test - usually the tube agglutination test. This test reports results
as a titer. Any titer of 1:200 or greater is considered positive
and titers of less that 1:200 are considered suspect. No titer indicates
a negative test. Our lab had had problems earlier in the year with
one outside lab that was reporting many false positives. So Brucellosis
tests were now being sent to the State diagnostic lab (C.E. Kord Lab -
Nashville, TN).
When I received the results
on these dogs I was shocked. I had one dog that was positive at 1:200
and four were suspect at 1:50. What should I do when these animals
were showing no clinical signs? The clinical pathologist at our local
lab recommended treating with antibiotics and then retesting. I decided
to check with the experts before doing anything. (I had a personal
interest in the outcome of these results - I was to pick up a puppy sired
by one of her dogs in the next few weeks.)
I read several current articles
on Brucellosis but they only addressed dogs in kennels with clinical signs.
The articles stated that the Brucella canis organism can stay hidden for
weeks and even months in varying tissues in the body. Titers usually
become detectable 8 to 12 weeks after infection. Antibody titers
remain high (1:400 to 1:3200) as long as the organism is circulating the
bloodstream. When circulation of the Brucella canis organism only
intermittently occurs or subsides as it does with chronic infection, then
antibody titers decline and may become equivocal (1:50 to 1:200) or negative.
However, the organism still persists in infected tissues. In some
animals there are fluctuations in titers depending on whether or not there
are circulating Brucella organisms. Therefore the level of the titer
does not necessarily reflect the stage of the disease nor do declining
titers indicate recovery from infection. Treating the affected dogs
with antibiotics could cloud any future testing. How would you know
if the titers decreased due to treatment or because we may have had a false
positive on the first test?
I called our local veterinary
school - Mississippi State College of Veterinary Medicine. I was
advised by them to consult with either Dr. Paul Nicoletti at the University
of Florida or Dr. Cheri Johnson at Michigan State. The microbiologist
at Mississippi State should also be consulted.
I was able to reach Dr. Cheri
Johnson at Michigan State first. First she advised not to treat the
dogs with antibiotics and to isolate the dog with the 1:200 titer as a
precautionary measure. Retesting of the dogs with suspect or positive
titers should be done. This blood should be sent to Cornell University*
for a AGID (agar gel immunodifusion) test. Cornell is considered
the top lab for doing Brucellosis testing by most people in the field.
One of the suspect dogs was a breeding male and she suggested culturing
the semen. Culturing the blood for the Brucella organism in the positive
(1:200) dog was also an option.
Dr. F. W. Austin, the microbiologist
at Mississippi State, was then consulted. He said that all tests
for Brucellosis had much room for error. Culturing blood to get the
Brucella organism was difficult at best even if the dog had a high titer.
Culturing semen was somewhat easier but it was still difficult to find
the organism. Dr. Austin indicated that there were still some false
positives associated with the tube agglutination test and that one positive
or suspect test should not be considered evidence of Brucellosis.
The AGID test is the most specific serologic test currently available.
He reiterated Dr. Johnson's feeling that Cornell should be the one to run
the test. Another test - an ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay)
test is also good but there is a very limited availablity of this test.
After talking with Dr. Austin,
I ruled out culturing the semen of the suspect dog. The male was
a shy breeder and would be difficult to collect. I also decided to
wait on culturing the blood of the positive dog. I would send blood
samples for the AGID test on the positive dog first. A clean serum
sample was sent on ice by Federal Express. Two days later I called
Cornell and was told that the AGID test was negative as well as a tube
agglutination test they run at the same time. What a relief!
Blood samples from the four suspect dogs were then sent. Again the
AGID and tube agglutination tests were all negative.
Although I earned a few extra
gray hairs over this ordeal, it was a learning experience. First,
no matter what test is run for Brucellosis, if the test comes back positive
(especially if the dog show no clinical signs), have the dog tested again
using at least one other test. Be firm in requiring that dogs coming
into your kennel have a negative Brucellosis test. And last, but
not least, any problem like this should be dealt with quickly with the
help of your veterinarian and other experts.
* Diagnostic Laboratory - New York
State College of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University, P. O. Box 5786,
Ithaca, NY 14852-5786
Phone: 607-253-3900, Fax: 607-253-3943.
Ruth Wilburn, D.V.M.
10368 Goodman Road
Olive Branch, MS 38654
662-895-6001
