Background and Aim: Canine vector-borne pathogens, particularly blood parasites, pose significant health threats to domestic dogs, ranging from subclinical infections to severe systemic diseases. In Thailand, microscopic examination remains the standard diagnostic method, despite its limitations. This study aimed to (i) determine the prevalence of major canine vector-borne pathogens in Bangkok, Thailand during the 2024 rainy season and (ii) evaluate the diagnostic performance of microscopy and a novel RNase hybridization-assisted amplification (RHAM) test kit in detecting canine Ehrlichiosis, compared to the quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) gold standard. Materials and Methods: A total of 134 whole blood samples were collected from clinically suspected dogs. Microscopy was performed on Giemsa-stained blood smears, and the RHAM test kit was employed for nucleic acid detection. qPCR served as the reference method. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and precision of each diagnostic method were calculated relative to qPCR results. Results: Microscopic examination revealed the following infection prevalences: Ehrlichia spp. (26.12%), Babesia spp. (4.48%), Hepatozoon canis (6.72%), Anaplasma spp. (0.75%), Dirofilaria immitis (3.73%), and Brugia spp. (3.73%). Compared with qPCR, microscopy demonstrated a sensitivity of 51.47%, specificity of 87.88%, accuracy of 69.40%, and precision of 81.39% for Ehrlichiosis detection. In contrast, the RHAM test kit achieved markedly higher diagnostic metrics: Sensitivity (91.18%), specificity (98.48%), accuracy (94.78%), and precision (98.41%). Notably, the RHAM kit provided rapid, user-friendly detection, approximating qPCR diagnostic performance, although its sensitivity slightly declined in samples with very low pathogen titers. Conclusion: This study highlights the continued high prevalence of Ehrlichiosis among dogs in Bangkok during the rainy season. Although microscopy remains practical, its diagnostic limitations are significant. The RHAM test kit demonstrated excellent sensitivity and specificity, offering a rapid and accurate alternative for Ehrlichiosis detection, particularly suitable for resource-limited settings lacking qPCR capabilities. Adoption of the RHAM assay could improve early diagnosis and management of canine Ehrlichiosis at grassroots veterinary facilities. Keywords: canine blood parasites, ehrlichiosis, microscopy, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, RNase hybridization-assisted amplification test kit.

Feline leukemia virus (FeLV) and Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) are globally prevalent retroviral pathogens that pose significant health risks to domestic cats. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of two point-of-care—the immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and the RNase hybridization-assisted amplification (RHAM) test kit—against reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), the current gold standard for FeLV and FIV detection. For FeLV detection, ICA demonstrated a sensitivity of 86.89%, specificity of 96.55%, accuracy of 90.00%, and precision of 98.15%, while for FIV detection, the assay showed a sensitivity of 75.86%, specificity of 88.52%, accuracy of 84.44%, and precision of 75.86%. In contrast, the RHAM test exhibited superior performance, with FeLV detection sensitivity of 93.44%, specificity of 98.28%, accuracy of 94.44%, and precision of 98.28%. For FIV detection, RHAM demonstrated a sensitivity of 75.86%, specificity of 100%, accuracy of 92.22%, and precision of 100%. Additionally, the RHAM assay significantly reduced detection time compared to RT-qPCR, enabling expedited clinical decision-making, alleviating laboratory workload, and lowering diagnostic costs. These benefits are particularly relevant in veterinary settings with limited access to PCR-based diagnostics, where the RHAM assay represents a rapid, reliable, and resource-efficient alternative for FeLV and FIV detection.

Background and Aim: Serum progesterone concentration plays critical role in determining the optimal breeding time in bitches and diagnosing reproductive-related issues. This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of serum progesterone results obtained from commercial point-of-care immunological analyzers, namely, Vcheck®, with those obtained using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). Our overarching goal was to evaluate these analyzers’ accuracy and establish standardized guidelines for optimal breeding timing. Materials and Methods: Ninety-four serum samples from bitches were analyzed using the Vcheck® analyzer and compared with CMIA. Thorough documentation included the mean, standard deviation, 95% confidence interval (CI), and minimum and maximum values of serum progesterone concentrations. Furthermore, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient, and the bias correction factor were meticulously recorded. Results: The mean progesterone concentration measured using the Vcheck® analyzer was significantly lower than that measured using CMIA, with a mean difference of 1.26 ng/mL of serum. The Bias correction factor was 0.935, which was nearly 1.00, indicating that the line of best-fit was on the perfect line of agreement, providing insight into the measurement accuracy. Pearson’s correlation coefficient, a measure of precision, was also close to 1 (0.939), confirming the reliability of the data. Furthermore, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient was 0.877, indicating a fair overall agreement between the Vcheck® and CMIA methods. These results support the validity of the Vcheck® analyzer’s results. The present study was developed by aligning with established CMIA guidelines and adapting them using the range and 95% CI derived from each set of results, ensuring a standardized and rigorous approach. Conclusion: The Vcheck® analyzer provides a rapid assessment of serum progesterone concentration in bitches, with results comparable to those measured using the CMIA technique. However, when considering the use of the Vcheck® analyzer, it is recommended that the results should be interpreted carefully and the interpretation guidelines should be followed. In conclusion, Vcheck® provides a reliable and convenient method for veterinarian practitioners to measure canine progesterone levels in a clinical/hospital setting. Keywords: chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay, optimal breeding time, progesterone, Vcheck®.

Surgical intervention is essential for many orthopedic conditions in dogs, which are a common cause of pain and debilitation

The measurement of serum progesterone often varies due to different laboratory methodologies and individual canine characteristics. In this investigation, serum progesterone outcomes obtained from a commercial point-of-care immunological analyzer, designed for efficient serum progesterone assessment in bitches, were compared with results derived from chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay from reference laboratories in Thailand. Our thorough documentation encompassed various parameters: mean, standard deviation, 95% confidence interval, and minimum and maximum serum progesterone concentration values. Additionally, we meticulously recorded the Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient, and the bias correction factor. Interestingly, there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the means obtained by the point-of-care immunological analyzer and chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the point-of-care immunological analyzer and chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay stood at 0.957, with Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for point-of-care immunological analyzer recorded as 0.949. Furthermore, the bias correction factor was established at 0.991. This investigation followed established chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay guidelines, modified to incorporate the mean and 95% confidence interval as criteria for optimal breeding time using the point-of-care immunological analyzer. In conclusion, the commercial point-of-care immunological analyzer emerges as a valuable tool, aiding in precisely determining the optimal timing for natural mating or artificial insemination in bitches.

The measurement of sP4 often varies due to different laboratory methodologies and individual canine characteristics. In this investigation, sP4 outcomes obtained from a commercial POC analyzer, designed for efficient sP4 assessment in bitches, were compared with results derived from CMIA, the reference laboratories in Thailand. Thorough documentation encompassed various parameters: mean, standard deviation (SD), 95% confidence interval (CI), minimum and maximum sP4 concentration values. Additionally, we meticulously recorded the Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient, and the bias correction factor. Interestingly, there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the means obtained by the POC and CMIA. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient between POC and CMIA stood at 0.957, with Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for POC recorded as 0.949. Furthermore, the bias correction factor was established at 0.991. This investigation followed established CMIA guidelines, modified to incorporate the mean and 95% CI as criteria for optimal breeding time using the POC analyzer. In conclusion, the commercial POC immunologic analyzer emerges as a valuable tool, aiding in precisely determining the optimal timing for natural mating or artificial insemination in bitches.