+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Preventive efficacy of Frontline ® Combo and Certifect ® against Dipylidium caninum infestation of cats and dogs using a natural flea ( Ctenocephalides felis) infestation model Translated title: Efficacité préventive de Frontline ® Combo et Certifect ® contre l’infestation par Dipylidium caninum chez le chat et le chien, utisant une modèle d’infestation naturelle par les puces ( Ctenocephalides felis)

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Two studies were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of two monthly topical anti-flea products for the prevention of Dipylidium caninum infestations in cats and dogs. A single treatment with Frontline ® Combo spot-on for cats (fipronil-(S)-methoprene) and two successive monthly treatments of Certifect ® for dogs (fipronil-amitraz-(S)-methoprene) were assessed for the prevention of D. caninum infestations following weekly challenges of treated cats or dogs with metacestode naturally-infected fleas. The rate of infestations using the model in cats versus dogs explains the choice of a 1-month trial in cats and a 2-month trial in dogs. The experimental flea-infection model resulted in a range of 22–53% of the fleas being infected by Dipylidium cysticercoids. The arithmetic mean flea counts recorded for the untreated cats ranged from 51.2 to 68. The geometric mean flea counts recorded for the Frontline Combo treated cats differed significantly ( p < 0.05) from those of the untreated control cats on all assessment days. The arithmetic mean flea counts recorded for the untreated dogs ranged from 166.6 to 238.6. The geometric mean flea counts recorded for the Certifect treated dogs differed significantly ( p < 0.001) from those of the untreated group on all assessment days. Frontline Combo treatment on cats provided ≥99.8% persistent anti-flea efficacy throughout the 30-day treatment period. In the dog study, the two Certifect treatments provided ≥97% persistent efficacy throughout the 60-day study. Based on the collection of expelled D. caninum proglottids by cats, 100% (6/6) of the control cats and 0% (0/6) of Frontline Combo treated cats were infested with D. caninum. Frontline Combo spot-on for cats was therefore 100% effective in preventing infection with D. caninum. In dogs, 7 out of the 8 control group dogs (87.5%) produced proglottids following infestation of infected fleas, whereas 0 out of 8 dogs (0%) in the treated group were infected. The infection rates of the two groups were significantly different. The percent effectiveness for the Certifect treatment group for the prevention of D. caninum infection was 100% during this 2-month trial. No treatment-related adverse events were observed in either cats or dogs during these studies.

          Translated abstract

          Deux études ont été effectuées pour évaluer l’efficacité de deux produits mensuels anti-puces pour la prévention de l’infestation de Dipylidium caninum chez les chats et chiens. Un traitement unique avec Frontline ® Combo spot-on pour chats (fipronil-(S)-methoprene) et deux traitements mensuels successifs de Certifect ® pour chiens (fipronil-amitraz-(S)-methoprene) ont été évalués vis-à-vis de la prévention de l’infestation par D. caninum suivant des infestations hebdomadaires par des puces naturellement infectées par les larves du cestode. Le taux des infestations utilisant le modèle chez les chats, par rapport aux chiens, explique le choix d’un essai sur un mois chez les chats et de deux mois chez les chiens. Le modèle expérimental d’infection des puces a abouti à un taux d’infection de 22 à 53 % des puces par les larves cysticercoïdes de Dipylidium. Le comptage sur les chats non traités a donné une moyenne géométrique de 51.2 à 68 puces par chat. Les moyennes géométriques du nombre de puces comptabilisées sur les chats traités par le Frontline Combo étaient significativement différentes ( p < 0,05) des chats non traités pour tous les jours de comptage. La moyenne géométrique du nombre de puces sur les chiens non traités allait de 166,6 à 238,6. Les moyennes géométriques du nombre de puces sur les chiens traités au Certifect étaient significativement différentes des chiens non traités pour tous les jours de comptage ( p < 0,001). Le traitement des chats avec le Frontline Combo a eu une efficacité anti-puces persistante ≥99,8 % durant la période d’étude de 30 jours. Dans l’étude des chiens, les deux traitements avec le Certifect ont abouti à une efficacité persistante ≥97 % durant les 60 jours. Sur la base de la collecte des segments de D. caninum rejetés par les chats, 100 % (6/6) des chats non traités et 0 % (0/6) des chats traités avec le Frontline Combo ont été infestés par D. caninum. Frontline Combo spot-on a donc été efficace à 100 % dans la prévention de l’infestation des chats par D. caninum. Chez les chiens, 7 des 8 chiens non traités (87,5 %) ont produit des proglottis suivant l’infestation par les puces infectées, tandis qu’aucun des 8 chiens traités n’a été infesté (0 %). Les taux d’infestation étaient significativement différents entre les deux groupes. L’efficacité du traitement avec le Certifect dans la prévention de l’infestation des chiens par D. caninum a été de 100 % durant les 2 mois de l’étude. Aucun effet indésirable lié aux traitements n’a été noté durant ces études, ni chez les chats ni chez les chiens.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Emerging arthropod-borne diseases of companion animals in Europe.

          Vector-borne diseases are caused by parasites, bacteria or viruses transmitted by the bite of hematophagous arthropods (mainly ticks and mosquitoes). The past few years have seen the emergence of new diseases, or re-emergence of existing ones, usually with changes in their epidemiology (i.e. geographical distribution, prevalence, and pathogenicity). The frequency of some vector-borne diseases of pets is increasing in Europe, i.e. canine babesiosis, granulocytic anaplasmosis, canine monocytic ehrlichiosis, thrombocytic anaplasmosis, and leishmaniosis. Except for the last, these diseases are transmitted by ticks. Both the distribution and abundance of the three main tick species, Rhipicephalus sanguineus, Dermacentor reticulatus and Ixodes ricinus are changing. The conditions for such changes involve primarily human factors, such as travel with pets, changes in human habitats, social and leisure activities, but climate changes also have a direct impact on arthropod vectors (abundance, geographical distribution, and vectorial capacity). Besides the most known diseases, attention should be kept on tick-borne encephalitis, which seems to be increasing in western Europe, as well as flea-borne diseases like the flea-transmitted rickettsiosis. Here, after consideration of the main reasons for changes in tick vector ecology, an overview of each "emerging" vector-borne diseases of pets is presented.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Insecticide and acaricide molecules and/or combinations to prevent pet infestation by ectoparasites.

            External antiparasitic drugs used in cats and dogs have evolved in terms of active ingredients but also regarding formulations. Old chemical groups have been supplanted by phenylpyrazoles, neonicotinoids, oxadiazines, spinosyns or others which are entering the veterinary market. In addition to insecticides-acaricides, insect and mite growth inhibitors (IGRs) have emerged. These IGRs are used in animals or in the environment, either alone or in combination with insecticides-acaricides. The notion of antiparasitic treatment has evolved to the concept of prevention of ectoparasite infestation but also of transmitted diseases through the introduction of formulations providing long-lasting activity. At the same time, ease-of-use has been improved with the development of spot-on formulations. Progress has also been achieved through the development of antiparasitic drugs providing control of both external and internal parasites. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prevalence of flea infestation in dogs and cats in Hungary combined with a survey of owner awareness.

              A survey was conducted in order to gain current information on flea species (Siphonaptera: Pulicidae) infesting dogs and cats living in urban and rural areas of Hungary, along with data on the factors that affect the presence, distribution and seasonality of infestation. In addition, owner awareness of flea infestation was evaluated. Practitioners in 13 veterinary clinics were asked to examine all dogs and cats attending the clinic and to collect fleas, when present, on 2 days in each month from December 2005 to November 2006. They also completed a questionnaire for each animal examined. A total of 319 dogs (14.1%) were found to be infested; the highest prevalence (27.1%) of infestation on dogs occurred in August and the lowest (5.4%) in May. Prevalence of fleas on cats was higher (22.9%); the highest (35.0%) and lowest (8.1%) prevalences occurred in July and April, respectively. Fleas were more prevalent in rural (387/1924 animals, 20.2%) than in urban (161/1343 animals, 12.0%) areas. Three species, Ctenocephalides felis (Bouché), Ctenocephalides canis (Curtis) and Pulex irritans L., were found. On dogs, the prevalence of C. canis alone was 53.0%, whereas that of C. felis alone was 36.0%. Only 19 specimens of P. irritans were found on 14 dogs from rural habitats only. Prevalence of C. felis only on cats was 94.3%; the remaining cats were infested with either C. canis or with mixed infestations of C. felis and C. canis. More than half (51.4%) of the owners of infested dogs and cats had not used flea control products in the past year or more, and five times as many owners in rural than urban areas had not used flea control products in the same period. Very few owners reported having attempted to kill fleas in their animals' environment; instead, they believed that fleas were acquired from other cats or dogs.

                Author and article information

                EDP Sciences
                19 February 2013
                : 20
                : ( publisher-idID: parasite/2013/01 )
                [1 ] Merial 29 Av T. Garnier 69007 Lyon France
                [2 ] ClinVet International (Pty) Ltd 9321 Universitas South Africa
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: frederic.beugnet@ 123456merial.com
                parasite120019 10.1051/parasite/2013006
                © F. Beugnet et al., Published by EDP Sciences 2013

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 6, Equations: 0, References: 26, Pages: 8
                Research Article


                Comment on this article