Cited by 4Vector-borne infectious diseasesVector-Borne Animal DiseasesResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies

Current distribution of selected vector-borne diseases in domestic dogs from Bucharest, Romania

Open access
Sandu, Ioana, Cristea, Cristian Daniel, Ionică, Angela M., Deak, Georgiana·2025·Veterinary Medicine and Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Canine vector-borne diseases (CVBDs) include various illnesses affecting dogs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of major CVBDs in domestic dogs in Bucharest, Romania's largest urban centre, which is situated along the Dâmbovița River in the southeastern region. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The present study included 317 dogs presented to a veterinary hospital for routine health examinations or specialised consultations between August 2020 and August 2024. Two rapid serological tests (SNAP 4Dx Plus and SNAP Leishmania) were used to assess infection rates. RESULTS: The findings revealed an overall seroprevalence of 8.8% for CVBDs, with Dirofilaria immitis exhibiting a prevalence of 12.62%. The seroprevalence of Ehrlichia spp. fluctuated over the years, peaking at 8.33% in 2022, resulting in an overall prevalence of 4.73%. An increase in Ehrlichia spp. seroprevalence during the 4 years was correlated with the presence of Rhipicephalus species in the region. Anaplasma spp. also showed a rising trend, with an overall prevalence of 4.42% and an increase from 2.94% in 2020 to 8.33% in 2024. In contrast, Borrelia burgdorferi exhibited low seroprevalence, and no positive cases for Leishmania spp. were detected. CONCLUSION: This study assesses Bucharest's status as an endemic area for ehrlichial diseases and dirofilariosis, highlighting significant public health concerns. Globalisation, tourism and climate change are factors that influence vector biology, and it is crucial to develop a strategic management plan for the prevention and control of vector-borne diseases.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/vms3.70415

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Age is not necessarily associated with a greater risk of infection per unit of time, but prevalence tends to increase with host age, most likely reflecting cumulative exposure over time in endemic areas.

    “Likewise, although age is not necessarily associated with a greater risk of infection per unit of time, prevalence tends to increase with host age, most likely reflecting cumulative exposure over time in endemic areas (4, 5, 8–13).”

    From Deciphering the socio-environmental factors associated with realized heartworm transmission risk in dogs from Portugal and Spain (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Discussion links higher D. immitis prevalence in older dogs to longer lifetime exposure to vectors, and Table 5 shows prevalence rising across age groups (7.69%, 12.82%, 17.71%). The age-group difference was not statistically significant (Results, Table 5; p = 0.1). The paper does not assess whether infection risk per unit of time changes with age, so that part of the attributed claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sandu, I., Cristea, C. D., Ionică, A. M., & Deak, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest (RO)
  • Pet Stuff Veterinary Hospital Bucharest Romania
  • Clinical Hospital of Infectious Diseases of Cluj‐Napoca Cluj‐Napoca Romania
  • University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca (RO)
Corresponding author
  • Sandu, Ioana
  • Deak, Georgiana
Venue
Veterinary Medicine and Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-06-01
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
e70415-e70415
ISSN
2053-1095 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410929407
Cited by
4
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Veterinary Medicine and Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Vector-Borne Animal Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Research on Leishmaniasis Studies
Keywords
canine vector-borne diseases, dogs, seroprevalence, Dirofilaria immitis, ehrlichiosis, Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, Borrelia burgdorferi, Leishmania, Rhipicephalus, urban dogs, Bucharest, zoonoses
MeSH terms
Vector Borne Diseases, Anaplasmosis, Animals, Dirofilaria immitis, Dirofilariasis, Dog Diseases, Dogs, Female, Leishmaniasis, Male, Romania, Prevalence, Seroepidemiologic Studies, Ehrlichiosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review