Cited by 89Parasitic Diseases Research and TreatmentHelminth infection and controlVeterinary Medicine and Surgery

Heartworm infection in cats: 50 cases (1985–1997)

Open access
Atkins, Clarke E., DeFrancesco, Teresa C., Coats, Julie R., Sidley, Jennifer A., Keene, Bruce W.·2000·Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterize risk factors, clinical findings, usefulness of diagnostic tests, and prognosis in cats with naturally occurring heartworm infection (HWI). DESIGN: Retrospective study. ANIMALS: 50 cats with Dirofilaria immitis infection. PROCEDURE: Medical records, thoracic radiographs, and echocardiograms were reviewed and findings compared with appropriate reference populations. RESULTS: Findings suggested that male cats were not predisposed to HWI, domestic shorthair cats were at increased risk, and indoor housing was only partially protective. Fewer cases of HWI were identified in the final quarter of the year, compared with other periods, and prevalence is not apparently increasing. Signs of respiratory tract disease were most common, followed by vomiting. Infection was diagnosed incidentally in > 25% of cats; conversely, 10% of infected cats died suddenly without other clinical signs. Serologic tests were most useful for diagnosis, followed by radiography and echocardiography. Eosinophilia supported the diagnosis. Overall median survival time was 1.5 years but exceeded 4 years in cats surviving beyond the day of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Sex does not appear to be a risk factor for HWI in cats, and indoor housing provides only incomplete protection. Signs of respiratory tract disease (dyspnea and cough) are the strongest indicators of HWI in cats, and some radiographic evidence of infection is detected in most cases. Antibody screening for HWI in cats is efficacious, and antigen testing and echocardiography are most useful for making a definitive antemortem diagnosis.

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 · 10.2460/javma.2000.217.355

Cites

13 of 13 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Wong M, Pedersen NC, Cullen J. Dirofilariasis in cats. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983;19:855-864.
  2. McCall JW, Dzimianski MT, McTier TL, et al. Biology of experimental heartworm infection in cats. In: Soll MD, Knight DH, eds. Proceedings of the American Heartworm Symposium '92. Batavia, Ill: American Heartworm Society 1992;71-79.
  3. DeFrancesco TD, Atkins CE, Miller MW, et al. Diagnostic utility of echocardiography in feline heartworm disease. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;In press.
  4. Miller MW, Atkins CE, Robertson C, et al. Prevalence of exposure to Dirofilaria immitis in multiple areas in the United States. In: Soll MD, Knight DH, eds. Proceedings of the American Heartworm Symposium '98. Batavia, Ill: American Heartworm Society, 1998; 161-166.
  5. Manella C, Donoghue AR. Feline heartworm disease: facts and myths. Vet Forum 1999;16:50-65.
  6. McCall JW, Nonglak S, Ryan W, et al. Utility of ELISA-based antibody test for detection of heartworm infection in cats. In: Soll MD, Knight DH, eds. Proceedings of the American Heartworm Symposium '95. Batavia, Ill: American Heartworm Society, 1995;127-133.
  7. Genchi C, Kramer L, Venco L, et al. Comparison of anti- body and antigen testing with echocardiography for detection of heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) in cats. In: Soll MD, Knight DH, eds. Proceedings of the American Heartworm Symposium '98. Batavia, Ill: American Heartworm Society, 1998;173-177.
  8. Watkins BF, Toro M, Toro G. Prevalence of heartworm anti- body and antigen-positive sera among submissions to a commercial laboratory in the USA. In: Soll MD, Knight DH, eds. Proceedings of the American Heartworm Symposium '98. Batavia, Ill: American Heartworm Society, 1998;145-152.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Atkins, C. E., DeFrancesco, T. C., Coats, J. R., Sidley, J. A., & Keene, B. W.
Affiliations
North Carolina State University (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Published
2000-08-01
Volume
217
Issue
3
Pages
355-358
ISSN
0003-1488 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2148194987
Cited by
89
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Parasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Helminth infection and control
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Medicine and Surgery
Keywords
feline heartworm infection, Dirofilaria immitis, cats, risk factors, domestic shorthair cat, indoor housing, seasonal variation, serological diagnosis, antigen testing, echocardiography, thoracic radiography, eosinophilia, respiratory signs, prognosis, survival time
MeSH terms
Animals, Cat Diseases, Cats, Dirofilariasis, Female, Male, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Survival Analysis

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