2015 A retrospective clinical and epidemiological study on feline coronavirus (FCoV) in cats in Istanbul, Turkey

2015·0.45 MB·English

PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47

ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect

Preventive Veterinary Medicine

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/prevetmed

A retrospective clinical and epidemiological study on feline

coronavirus (FCoV) in cats in Istanbul, Turkey

B.K.Tekelioglua,E.Berriatuab,∗,N.Turanc,C.R.Helpsd,M.Kocaka,H.Yilmazc

aMackaVeterinaryClinic,Besiktas,Istanbul,Turkey
bAnimal HealthDep artme nt,Region alCamp usofInternationalExcellence“CampusMareNostrum”,UniversidaddeMurcia,Murcia,

Spain
cUniversityofIstanbul,VeterinaryFaculty,DepartmentofVirology,Avcilar,Istanbul,Turkey
dUniversity of Bristol,L angfordVet erinary Services,Chu rch illBuildi ng,Lang fordHous e,Langford,Bristol,UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Articlehistory: The presence of antibodies to feline coronavirus (FCoV) and feline immunodeficiency
Receiv ed16June2014 viru s(FIV),to get herwithfe lin eleuke miavirus(F eLV)an tigen was investigatedin169
RAeccceepivteedd i2n4 r Jeavnisue adry fo2r0m1 56 January 2015 ill hou sehol d and stra y cats attend ing a vete rinary surger y in Istan bul i n 2009–14. T he esti-
matedFCoVandFIVseroprevalence(95%confidenceintervals)were37%(30–45%)and11%

(6–16%),respectivelyandFeLVprevalencewas1%(0–3%).FCoVseroprevalenceincreased
Keywords: until2ye arsofage,w ash ighes tin2014an dam on ghouse hold catslivingwith othercats
Antibody
andwithoutdooraccess,andwaslowerinFIVseropositivecomparedtoseronegativecats.
Cat
Symptomstypicallyassociatedwithwetfelineinfectiousperitonitis(FIP)includingascites,
Felinecoronavirus
abdominaldistentionorpleuraleffusion,coupledinmanycaseswithnon-antibioticrespon-
Clinical
Epidemiology sivefever,wereobservedin19%(32/169)ofcats,and75%(24/32)ofthesecatswereFCoV

Istanbul seropositive.FCoVseropositivitywasalsoassociatedwithahighwhitebloodcellcount,

Turkey highplasmaglobulin,lowplasmaalbuminandlowbloodureanitrogen.Thepercentageof

FCoVseropositiveandseronegativecatsthatdiedinspiteofsupportiveveterinarytreat-

mentwas33%(21/63)and12%(13/106),respectively.TheseresultsindicatethatFCoVis

widespreadandhasasevereclinicalimpactincatsfromIstanbul.Moreover,theincidence

ofFCoVinfectionscouldberising,andintheabsenceofeffectivevaccinationcatowners

needtobemadeawareofwaystominimizethespreadofthisvirus.

©2015ElsevierB.V.Allrightsreserved.

1. Introduction anddifficulttogrowincellculture.SerotypeIIappearsto

havearisenfromtherecombinationofFCoVserotypeIwith

Feline coronaviruses (FCoVs) are enveloped, positive- caninecoronavirusandgrowsrapidlyincellculturecaus-

sense,single-strandedRNAvirusesclassifiedas“subgroup ingalyticcytopathiceffect(Benetkaetal.,2004;Hartmann,

1a”inthefamilyCoronaviridaewithintheorderNidovirales 2005;Pedersen,2009).ItisthoughtthattheFIPVbiotype

(Vijaykrishnaetal.,2007).FCoVsconsistoftwobiotypes mayarisefromFECVsinindividualcatsbyinternalmuta-

designatedasfelineentericcoronavirus(FECV)andfeline tion,ofteninimmunesuppressedcats(Polandetal.,1996;

infectiousperitonitisvirus(FIPV),whicharebothdivided Vennema,1999).AnalternativehypothesisisthatFECVs

into two serotypes, I and II. Serotype I is of feline origin andFIPVsformdistinctviralpopulationswithinfectionby

FIPVcausingFIP(Brownetal.,2009).

FCoVsaretransmittedbythefecal–oralrouteandthe

∗ viruscanpersistonfomitesfor3–7weekswheretheypose
EC-omrraeilsapdodnrdeisnsg: baeurtrhiaotru. @Teulm.: +.e3s4( E8.6B8e 8rr8i3a t9u9a7).; fax: [phone]. a risk of transm issi on (Har tma nn, 2005; Peders en, 2 009;

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2015.01.017
0167-5877/©2015ElsevierB.V.Allrightsreserved.
42 B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47

Kiparetal.,2010).FCoVsprimarilyinfectenterocytesand spreadofFCoVsinabreedingcattery,multi-cathousehold

spreadfromtheintestinebymonocyte-associatedviremia andFCoV-freehousehold(Caveetal.,2004;Dyeetal.,2008;

(Gunn-Moore et al., 1998; Kipar et al., 2005). They have Drechsleretal.,2011).Therefore,itisimportanttomoni-

alsobeenshowntoreplicateinmonocytes/macrophagesof torcatslivinginmulti-catenvironmentsinordertoreduce

healthycats(Can-Sahnaetal.,2007;Dyeetal.,2008).Ver- andcontrolFCoVinfection.

ticaltransmissionhasnotbeendemonstrated(Foleyetal., TheaimofthisstudywastoinvestigateFCoVseropreva-

1997).Persistentlyinfected,asymptomaticcarriersspread lence and its relationship with the animal’s signalment,

FCoVsincemostofthesecatsshedthevirusforaperiodof habitat, hematological and biochemical parameters and

monthsoryears,eithercontinuouslyortransiently(Foley symptomsincatsfromIstanbul.

etal.,1997;Caveetal.,2004;Dyeetal.,2008;Kiparetal.,
20 10; Sabsh inet al., 20 12). 2. Materialsandmethods

The symptoms of FCoV infection are highly variable.

MostFCoV-infectedcatslookhealthywiththeexceptionof 2.1. Studypopulationandsampling

amildenteritis(Pedersen,2009).Upto12%ofFCoVinfected

catsdevelopfelineinfectiousperitonitis(FIP),whichisa During 5 years, from January 2009 to April 2014, a

fatalformoftheinfection(Addieetal.,2009).Development total of 169 cats with symptoms compatible with feline

ofFIPisstronglyassociatedwithstress,immunity,multi- viral infections were included in the study population.

cathouseholdsandmainlyoccursinyoungcatsbetween3 Theyincludedindividualswithfever,depression,dullness

and16monthsofage(Caveetal.,2004;Hartmann,2005; and/or weight loss. They were examined by two differ-

Belletal.,2006;Addieetal.,2009;Vogeletal.,2010).Clin- ent veterinarians working at a private Veterinary Clinic

ically, two forms of FIP are well documented: a ‘wet’ or in Istanbul. The animals’ gender, breed, age and hábi-

effusive form (polyserositis and vasculitis) and a ‘dry’ or tat whether household, shelter or street (stray cats) was

non-effusive form (pyogranulomatous lesions in organs) recorded.Otherdatafromhouseholdcatsincludedifthey

(Kipar et al., 2005). Ascites is the most prominent mani- wereadoptedorhomeraisedfrombirth,theycohabitated

festationof‘wetform’FIPwhilelethargy,anorexia,weight withothercatsandhadoutdooraccess.

loss and fever refractory to antibiotics are common and Cats were clinically examined to detect fever, skin

non-specific signs of FIP (Kipar et al., 2005; Addie et al., lesions, behavioral changes (insidious onset, depression)

2009). and symptoms related to organ systems were recorded;

DiagnosisofFIPiscomplicatedandthecat’sclinicalhis- specifically, cardiorespiratory (dyspnea, abnormal heart

torytogetherwithresultsfromseveralanalysesincluding andlungsounds),gastrointestinal(anorexia,weightloss,

serology,PCRandpostmortemanalysesareoftenrequired stomatitis, enteritis, abdominal distension, vomication,

before a definite diagnosis can be reached (Shelly et al., ascites), urinary, circulatory (lymphoadenopathy, ane-

1988; Hartmann et al., 2003; Addie et al., 2004, 2009; mia, icterus), ocular lesions (keratic precipitates, uveitis,

Pratelli, 2008; Sharif et al., 2010; Taylor et al., 2010). hyphema,iridocyclitis,chorioretinitis)andcentralnervous

Hematological and biochemical changes in FIP cases are system(epilepticseizures,ataxia)symptoms.

not very specific, but ascites, increase in serum protein Blood samples were taken from the cephalic vein by

level, increase in bilirubin, decrease in hematocrit and theveterinariansexaminingthecatsforhematologicaland

decrease in A:G ratio are prominent (Addie et al., 2009). biochemicalanalysesandtodetectantibodiesagainstFCoV

Serological tests may fail to detect recent infections and and feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) together with

cross-reactions occur between FIPV and low pathogenic feline leukemia virus (FeLV) antigen as described below.

FECVstrains(Hartmann,2005,Sharifetal.,2010).Molecu- AllanalysisexceptFCoVIFATantibodieswerecarriedout

lardetectionsystemslikestandardandrealtimereverse attheveterinaryclinicwithinanhouroftakingtheblood

transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) have cer- sample.IFATtestsandproteinelectrophoresiswerecarried

tainadvantagesastheyarerapidandsensitive,particularly outatanexternalprivateveterinarylaboratory.

whenusingabdominalorpleuralfluidortissuebiopsyor Diseaseprogressionofthestudycatswasevaluateddur-

aspirates(Pedersen,2009;Sharifetal.,2010).ArecentPCR ingrepeatvisitstotheclinicandmortalitywasconsidered
test that is commer cially availa ble (F IP Viru s RealPC RTM tob eassoc iated to the curre ntin fectionw hen thecatdid

Test,IDEXX)allowsdifferentiatingFIPVandlowpathogenic notrespondtostandardtreatmentswhichincludedfluid

FECV biotypes, and according to the manufacturers, the andantibiotictherapy.

testwas99.4%accurateinsamplesfrom88%infectedcats

withapositivePCRresult.PCRresultsshouldbeevaluated 2.2. AnalysisofserumsamplesforantibodiestoFCoV

together with clinical findings and postmortem samples andFIVandforFeLVantigen

shouldbeanalyzedbymolecularmethods(Sparkesetal.,

1994; Hartmann et al., 2003; Pratelli, 2008; Addie et al., All serum samples (n=169) were analyzed by rapid

2009;Pedersen,2009;Sharifetal.,2010). testsforthepresenceofantibodiestoFCoV(Bionote,Ani-

Worldwide the prevalence of FCoV infections may be gen, FCoV) and FIV (Bionote, Anigen FIV Ab), and FeLV

upto90%inmulti-catenvironmentsand10–60%inhouse- antigen (Bionote, FeLV Ag) following kits’ instructions.

hold cats (Herrewegh et al., 1997; Pedersen et al., 2004; According to the manufacturers, the sensitivity (Se) and

Bell et al., 2006; Addie et al., 2009; Sharif et al., 2009; specificity(Sp)oftheFCoVtestcomparedtothereference

Taharaguchietal.,2012).DetectionofFCoVantibodiesin immunofluorescence antibody test (IFA) were 96.0% and

theearlystageofinfectioncanbeusefultominimizethe 97.9%,respectively,SeandSPoftheFeLVtestversusvirus
B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47 43

Table1a

PercentageofFCoVseropositivecatsaccordingtoexaminationyear,gender,breed,andage.

Variables Level N No.seropositive %seropositive 95%CI pvalue

Lower Upper

Studyyear 2009 13 9 31 6 56 <0.0001

2010 20 15 25 6 44

2011 19 17 11 0 24

2012 35 24 31 16 47

2013 52 36 31 18 43

2014 30 5 83 70 97

Gender Female 70 42 40 29 51 0.6499

Male 99 64 35 26 45

Breed Crossbreed 142 88 38 30 46 0.8062

Purebreed 27 18 33 16 51

Age(years) 0.1–0.4 25 20 20 4 36 0.2031

0.6–0.8 13 8 38 12 65

1 38 22 42 26 58

2 24 12 50 30 70

3 24 12 50 30 70

4–5 16 13 19 0 38

6–9 14 10 29 5 52

10–15 15 9 40 15 65

isolation were 94.7% and 99.7%, respectively, and that of accordingtocatdemographicandhabitatexplanatoryvari-

the FIV tests versus Western Blot were 96.8% and 99.6%, ablesandtheproportionofsignsinFCoVseropositiveand

respectively. Sera found to be positive for antibodies to seronegativecats.Biochemicalandhematologicalresults

FCoVbytherapidtestwereanalyzedbyIFAinanexternal were categorized as being within (normal), above (high)

privatelaboratorytoconfirmtheresult.Serumgivingflu- orbelow(low)referencevalues(VilliersandBlackwood,

orescenceatadilutionabove1:20wasconsideredpositive 2005).

forantibodiesagainstthisvirus. The independent relationship between FCoV serolog-

ical status, and a cat’s demographic, habitat and FIV

2.3. Hematologicalandbiochemicalanalyses serological status was further investigated using logistic

regressionanalysis(KleinbaumandKlein,2010).FCoVwas

Allbloodsampleswereanalyzedforacompleteblood the binary outcome variable (seropositive or seronega-

hemogram–histogram(18parameters)usingaVeterinary tive).Theexplanatoryvariablesincludedthoseassociated

Specific Mindray blood analyzing kit and the Hemogram atp<0.05withFCoVserologicalstatusintheunivariable

Instrument (Mindray). Samples were also analyzed for analysis;theywereFIVserologicalstatus,age,examination

comprehensive blood biochemistry (14 parameters); 60 yearandthevariablereflectinglivingplace,outdooraccess

samples were analyzed using the Vet-Scan (Abaxis) kit and contact with other cats (Tables 1a and 1b). All vari-

andtheremainingsampleswereanalyzedusingReflotron ableswereincludedinthemodelascategoricalvariables

(Roche)kit.Serumproteinelectrophoresiswasperformed asshowninTables1aand1b,exceptage,whichincluded

forserumsamplespositiveforantibodiestoFCoV.Ascitic sevenlevelsaftercombiningdatafrom4to15yearoldcats

fluidfrom14catswasanalyzedforalbumin/globulin(A:G) intoasinglelevel.Modelparameterswereestimatedusing

ratio.Hematologicalandbiochemicaltestsincludedtotal the maximum likelihood estimation method and signifi-

whitebloodcellcount(WBC),lymphocyteandredblood cancewastakenforalphalessthan5%foradoublesided

cellcounts,hematocrit,hemoglobin,totalprotein,albumin test.

(alb.),globulin(glob.),alkalinephosphatase(ALP),alanine

transaminase (ALT), amylase, total bilirubin, blood urea

nitrogen(BUN),creatinine,glucose,calcium,phosphorus, 3. Results

sodiumandpotassium.

3.1. EstimatedFCoVandFIVseroprevalenceandFeLV

2.4. Statisticalanalyses prevalence

DatawereanalyzedusingR(http://cran.r-project.org/) AntibodiestoFCoVandFIVweredetectedin63/169and

software.Approximatelyunbiasedestimatesofprevalence 19/169 cats. Two out of 169 cats were positive for FeLV

werecalculatedassumingknownvaluesoftestSeandSp antigen.TheestimatedFCoVandFIVseroprevalenceand

using the Rogan–Gladen statistic (Greiner and Gardner, FeLVprevalence(95%CI)adjustedfortestsSeandSp,were

2000). Yates-corrected chi squared test, or when appro- 37%(30–45%),11%(6–16%)and1%(0–3%),respectively.All

priateFisher’sexacttest(KirwoodandSterne,2003),was catstestingFCoVantibodypositivetotherapidtestwere

usedtocomparetheproportionofFCoVseropositivecats alsoIFATantibodypositive.
44 B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47

Table1b

PercentageofFCoVseropositivecatsaccordingtoorigin,habitatandFIVstatus.

Variables Level N No.seropositive %seropositive 95%CI pvalue

Lower Upper

Home Household 122 73 40 31 49 0.2835

Street 47 33 30 17 43

Origin Homeraised 50 23 54 40 68 <0.0001

Petshop 16 6 63 39 86

Shelteradopted 3 0 100 100 100

Streetadopted 100 77 26 18 34

Outdooraccess No 75 53 29 19 40 0.0805

Yes 94 53 44 34 54

Cohabitatingwithothercats No 37 12 14 2 25 0.0014

Yes 132 94 44 35 52

Home;outdooraccess;cohabitatingwithothercats Street,yes;yes 47 33 30 17 43 0.0002

House;no;no 37 32 14 2 25

House;no;yes 37 21 43 27 59

House;yes;yes 47 20 57 43 72

3.2. RelationshipbetweenFCoVserologicalstatus,year, conditionforwhichtheywereadmittedinspiteofreceiv-

demographicandhabitatvariables ingtreatment(p<0.05).

FCoVseroprevalencevariedsignificantlybystudyyear, 3.4. Hematologicalandbiochemicalparametersand
originan dhabitatvaria bles(p <0.05)(Tabl es 1aand 1b). rela tionshipwithFC oVs erologicalsta tus
Furthe rmo re,FCoV seroprev ale n cewa s5%(1/ 19) and 41%

(62/150) among FIV seropositive and seronegative cats, Results of the hematology and clinical chemistry are
respectiv ely (p< 0.05 ). Logistic re gres sion analysis con- shown in Tab le 3 b. Abnormal ities were p articularly fre-
firmed the i nde p enden t relatio nship of FC oV serolo gical quent in cats w ith ascites and ple ural e ffusion and 72%
statusw ith examination year,age,FIV st atus, habitatand (23/32 )a nd7 6%(24 /29)of cats withth esesigns had high
contac twith othercats(T able 2). WBCan dlow A:G ratio,r es pecti vely( notta bulate d).

3.3. Clinicalsymptoms,prognosisandrelationshipwith 4. Discussion

FCoVserologicalstatus

ThisstudyshowsthatFCoVinfectionsarewidespread

Clinical examination revealed depression or dullness, incatsfromIstanbulandthisisinagreementwithother

feverandlowbodyweightin81%(137/169),76%(128/169) studies elsewhere (Sparkes et al., 1992; Pedersen et al.,

and 70% (119/169) of study cats, respectively, and 57% 2004; Pesteanu-Somogyi et al., 2006; Sharif et al., 2009;

(96/169)ofcatshadallthreesigns.Thepercentageofcats Taharaguchietal.,2012;Parisetal.,2014).Moreover,FCoV

withascites,abdominaldistensionandpleuraleffusionwas seroprevalence increased in 2014 compared to previous

10% (17/169), 14% (24/169) and 5% (8/169), respectively. years and this may suggest that FCoV infections are an

Allthreesymptomswerepresentinonlyonecat,nocats increasing health problem in cats in Istanbul. High FCoV

hadpleuraleffusionandascitesorabdominalenlargement seroprevalence (up to 84%) has been reported in many

alone; in contrast, ascites and abdominal enlargement countries(Sparkesetal.,1992;Holstetal.,2006;Pratelli,

without pleural effusion were observed in 9% (15/169) 2008;Pratellietal.,2009;Sabshinetal.,2012;Taharaguchi

of cats and 19% (32/169) of cats presented one of these et al., 2012). In contrast, FCoV seroprevalence was com-

three conditions. The cat with all three symptoms was parativelylowinchronicallyill(19.3%)andevenlowerin

FCoVseronegativeinstead;FCoVseroprevalencewas93% healthycats(10.1%)inKorea(Dong-Junetal.,2011).Preva-

(14/15) in cats with ascites and abdominal enlargement lence may vary depending on the inclusion criteria used

and75%(24/32)incatswithatleastoneofthethreesymp- (normalversusillcats)andestimatesmaybeaffectedby

toms,and94%(30/32)oftheseweredullordepressed,had selection bias, analytical errors and imperfect diagnostic

feverand/orlowbodyweight. tests.

Thepercentageofsomeclinicalsignsdifferedaccord- Severalriskfactorshavebeenreportedtobeassociated

ing to the cat’s FCoV serological status (Table 3a). Other with FCoV infection and with FIP development, includ-

symptoms found included dyspnea (20/169), stomatitis ingage,breed,gender,multi-catenvironmentandstress

(13/169),ocularsigns(12/169),urinarytractsigns(12/169) (Bell et al., 2006; Pesteanu-Somogyi et al., 2006; Addie

and epilepsy (2/169) (not shown in table format). The et al., 2009; Sharif et al., 2009; Worthing et al., 2012).

prevalence of these symptoms was not significantly dif- Inthepresentstudy,FCoVserologicalstatuswassignifi-

ferentbetweenFCoVseropositiveandseronegativecats. cantlyassociatedwithyear,age,FIPserologicalstatusand

Thirty-threepercentofFCoVseropositivecats(21/63) habitatvariables.Theriskofinfectionwouldbeexpected

and 12% (13/106) of seronegative cats died from the to rise during the first months or years of life due to
B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47 45

Table2

Estimatesfromthelogistic-regressionmodelofFCoVserologicalstatusconversion.AstudyofcatsfromIstanbulin2009–14.

Variable Level OR 95%CI pvalue

Lower High

Examinationyear 2009 1 – – –

2010 0.54 0.08 3.54 0.5228

2011 0.14 0.01 1.35 0.0896

2012 0.57 0.11 3.01 0.5088

2013 0.72 0.15 3.55 0.6916

2014 7.57 1.25 45.83 0.0275

Age(years) 0.1–0.4 1 – – –

0.6–0.8 1.55 0.22 10.86 0.6587

1 1.41 0.30 6.68 0.6641

2 3.98 0.83 19.12 0.0844

3 7.57 1.34 42.86 0.0222

4–15 1.32 0.28 6.23 0.7258

Home;outdooraccess House;no;no 1 – – –

Cohabitatingwithcats House;no;yes 6.09 1.48 25.03 0.0122

House;yes;yes 12.87 3.15 52.57 0.0004

Street;yes;yes 3.12 0.77 12.63 0.1111

FIVstatus Seronegative 1 – – –

Seropositive 0.05 0.01 0.50 0.0106

Table3a

PercentageofcatswithclinicalsignsaccordingtotheirFCoVserologicalstatus.AstudyofcatsfromIstanbulin2009–14.

Variable FCoV pvalue

Seropositives Seronegatives

N No.affected %(95CI) N No.affected %(95CI)

Fever 63 41 65(53–77) 106 87 82(75–89) 0.0211

Depressionordullness 63 49 78(68–88) 106 88 83(76–90) 0.5235

Weightloss 63 37 59(47–71) 106 82 77(69–85) 0.0144

Vomiting 63 7 11(3–19) 106 35 33(24–42) 0.0027

Abdominaldistention 63 17 27(16–38) 106 7 7(2–11) 0.0006

Ascites 63 15 24(13–34) 106 2 2(0–4) <0.0001

Diarrhea 63 9 14(6–23) 106 4 4(0–7) <0.0001

Pleuraleffusion 63 6 10(2–17) 106 2 2(0–4) 0.0532

increasingcat-to-catcontact.However,itispossiblethat household.Furthermore,immunologicaldifferencescould

infection prevalence among 0.1–0.4 year-olds may have exist between stray and household cats, with the latter

been underestimated as several weeks would be needed being naturally selected for a protective Th-1 mediated

for anti-FCoV antibodies to develop following infection. ratherthanaTh-2antibodymediatedresponse.This,how-

Other studies have reported greater FCoV prevalence in ever,hasnotbeeninvestigatedandremainsspeculative.

cats3–11monthsofage(Belletal.,2006;Pedersen,2009; Interestingly,FIVseroprevalencewasnegativelyassoci-

Taharaguchietal.,2012).Instead,astudyinAustraliaand atedwithFCoVinfectioninthisstudy.Thereasonforthisis

MalaysiafoundnoassociationbetweenageandFCoVinfec- unclear.Itcouldbebecausehouseholdcatsarevaccinated

tionincats(Belletal.,2006;Sharifetal.,2009). forFIVinIstanbul.Itisalsopossiblethatcoinfectedcatsare

Householdcatslivingalonehadthelowestriskofbeing atgreaterriskofdyingasaresultofFIVimmunosuppres-

FCoVseropositive,asreportedinotherstudies(Addieetal., sioncomparedtocatsthatareonlyFCoVseropositive.

2009;Drechsleretal.,2011).Incontrast,thisstudyfound Inthepresentstudy,nodifferenceinFCoVseropreva-

thathouseholdcatsthatcohabitatedwithothercatshad lence was found between females and males. Similar

ahighriskofbeingFCoVseropositive,ashasbeenprevi- results have been found by others (Cave et al., 2004;

ously shown (Foley et al., 1997; Herrewegh et al., 1997; Bell et al., 2006; Holst et al., 2006; Sharif et al., 2009;

Pedersenetal.,2004;Pesteanu-Somogyietal.,2006;Sharif Taharaguchi et al., 2012). Instead, in Australia and the

etal.,2009;Sabshinetal.,2012).Moreover,inthepresent USA,malecatswerefoundtobemorefrequentlyinfected

study,FCoVseroprevalencewaslowerinstraycats(30%) withFCoV(Pesteanu-Somogyietal.,2006;Worthingetal.,

comparedtocatslivingathome(57%).Itispossiblethat 2012). There is no known biological reason supporting

straycatshavepoorerhealthandincreasedriskofdying gender-associated susceptibility and resistance to FCoV,

fromFCoVinfectionscomparedtohouseholdcats.Alterna- anddifferencesbetweenstudiescouldberelatedtomales

tively,straycatscouldbeexposedtolessFCoVcompared andfemaleshavingdifferentlifestylesandFCoVexposure.

to household cats, who commonly share the same litter BreedwasnotassociatedwithFCoVseropositivityinthe

boxandeatfromthesamefoodbowlasothercatsinthe presentstudy.Incontrast,higherFCoVseroprevalencehas
46 B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47

Table3b

PercentageofcatswithalteredhematologicalandbiochemicalparametersaccordingtotheirFCoVserologicalstatus.AstudyofcatsfromIstanbulin

2009–14.
Variable FCoV pvalue

Seropositives Seronegatives

N No.affected %(95CI) N No.affected %(95CI)

Hematology
HighWBC 63 41 65(53–77) 106 41 39(29–48) 0.0016

LowWBC 63 3 5(0–10) 106 18 17(10–24) 0.0369

Highlymphocyticcount 63 18 29(17–40) 106 22 21(13–28) 0.3326

Lowlymphocyticcount 63 4 6(0–12) 106 9 8(3–14) 0.7690

Highredbloodcellcount 63 21 33(22–45) 106 25 24(16–32) 0.2309

Lowredbloodcellcount 63 20 32(20–43) 106 21 20(12–27) 0.1177

Highhemoglobin 63 53 84(75–93) 106 96 91(85–96) 0.3140

Lowhemoglobin 63 0 0(0–0) 106 0 0(0–0) 1.0000

Highhematocrit 63 9 14(6–23) 106 6 6(1–10) 0.1038

Lowhematocrit 63 29 46(34–58) 106 36 34(25–43) 0.1627

Proteins
Highalbumin 63 0 0(0–0) 63 1 2(0–5) 1.0000

Lowalbumin 63 28 44(32–57) 63 5 8(1–15) <0.0001

Highglobulin 63 47 65(53–77) 63 7 11(3–19) <0.0001

Lowglobulin 63 0 0(0–0) 63 0 0(0–0) 1.0000

Highalb./glob.ratio 63 2 3(0–8) 63 2 3(0–8) 1.0000

Lowalb./glob.ratio 63 43 68(58–80) 63 9 14(6–23) <0.0001

Hightotalprotein 63 27 43(31–55) 63 9 14(6–23) 0.0008

Lowtotalprotein 63 0 0(0–0) 63 0 0(0–0) 1.0000

Kidney
HighBUN 63 0 0(0–0) 63 4 6(0–12) 0.1190

LowBUN 63 6 10(2–17) 63 0 0(0–0) 0.0276

Highurea 63 15 24(13–34) 76 50 66(55–76) 0.0001

Lowurea 63 0 0(0–0) 76 0 0(0–0) 0.2702

Highcreatinine 63 4 6(0–12) 74 7 9(3–16) 0.7246

Lowcreatinine 63 0 0(0–0) 74 0 0(0–0) 0.3473

Liver
HighALT 63 12 19(9–29) 106 35 33(24–42) 0.0747

LowALT 63 0 0(0–0) 106 2 2(0–4) 0.5296

HighALP 63 5 8(1–15) 68 2 3(0–7) 0.2603

LowALP 63 4 6(0–12) 68 6 9(2–16) 0.7460

Highbilirubin 63 0 0(0–0) 65 2 3(1–7) 0.4962

Lowbilirubin 63 0 0(0–0) 65 0 0(0–0) 0.8597

beenreportedinpurebredcatscomparedtonon-pedigree Addieetal.,2009;Pedersen,2009;Sharifetal.,2010;Tsai

catsinseveralstudies(Belletal.,2006;Pesteanu-Somogyi etal.,2011).Ithasbeenreportedthatupto12%ofFCoV

et al., 2006; Holst et al., 2006; Taharaguchi et al., 2012). infected cats develop FIP (Hartmann, 2005; Addie et al.,

InJapan,seroprevalencewashigheramongpedigreecats 2009;Pedersen,2009).Althoughinthepresentstudyno

includingAmericancurl,Mainecoon,Norwegianforestcat, definitivediagnosisofFIPwasattempted,19%ofcatshad

RagdollandScottishfoldcomparedtoAmericanshorthair, typical signs of wet FIP including abdominal distension,
Himalay an, Oriental , Per sian, and Sia mese (Ta haraguchi ascites andp leu rale ffusi on,andin creased(cid:2)-g lobulinand

etal.,2012).InAustralia,Siamese,Persian,DomesticShort- decreasedalbumin-to-globulin(A:G)ratio.Differencesin

hairs and Bengal cats had significantly lower prevalence thepercentageofFCoVcatsdevelopingFIPbetweenstud-

thanBritishShorthairs,CornishRexandBurmesecats(Bell iescouldbeassociatedwiththecatpopulationsexamined;

etal.,2006).AustralianstudiesreportedFCoVtobepreva- catsinvestigatedinthisstudywereclinicallyillandsus-

lent among British Shorthair, Devon Rex and Abyssinian pectedofhavingaviralinfection.

breeds(Worthingetal.,2012).InMalaysia,FCoVseropreva-

lencewashigherinPersian(96%)thaninmix-breedcats 5. Conclusions

(70%)(Sharifetal.,2009).Inthepresentstudytherewere

too few cats of specific breeds to allow robust statistical
This study indicates that FCoV infection in cats from
comparisons.Moreover,pureandmixedbreedcatsdidnot
Istanbulishighandpossiblyincreasing.Preventiveactions
differ significantly in terms of street access and contact
arenecessaryinmulti-catenvironments(shelters,catter-
withothercats.
iesandpetshops)andsinglehouseholdcatswithoutdoor
Critical evaluation is necessary for a cat to be diag-
access. Cats presenting with general malaise, including
nosedwithFIP.Diagnosisisbasedonevaluationofhistory,
fever not responding to antibiotics, depression, ascites,
symptoms, hematological and biochemical parameters,
abdominaldistension,diarrhea,pleuraleffusion,postsur-
diagnostictests,radiologyandtissuebiopsyresults(Shelly
gicalcomplicationsandalowA:Gratioshouldbesuspected
et al., 1988; Sparkes et al., 1994; Hartmann et al., 2003;
ofsufferingfromFIP.
B.K.Tekeliogluetal./PreventiveVeterinaryMedicine119(2015)41–47 47

Conflictofinterest Kipar,A.,Meli,M.L.,Baptiste,K.E.,Bowker,L.J.,Lutz,H.,2010.Sitesof
fel ine coron aviru spersiste nce inhealth yca ts.J.G en .Virol .7(9 1),
1698– 1707.
Theauthorsdeclarethattheyhavenoconflictofinter-
est. KirwBolaocdk, wB.eRl.l, PSutebrlniseh, iJn.Ag.,CO.,x 2fo0r0d3,. UEKss.ential Medical Statistics, second ed.
Kleinbaum,D. G.,Klein,M. ,2010.L ogisticRegression.ASelf-LearningTest.
References Statistic sfor Biolog yan dHea lth,thir ded.Spring er ,London.
Paris, J.K., W ills , S., Bal zer, H.J., Sh aw, D .J., Gunn-M oore, D.A., 2014.
En tero pathog en co-infec tioni nUKca tswi thdiarrhoea.B MCVe t.Res.
Addie, D., Belak, S., Boucraut-Baralon, C., Egberink, H., Frymus, T., 12,10–13.
Gr uffyd d-Jone s, T ., Hartmann, K., H osie , M.J., Llo ret, A., Lutz, H., Pederse n,N.C.,Sato,R.,Foley,J.E.,Poland,A.M.,2004.Commonvirusinfec-
Marsilio, F., Pe nni si, M.G., R adfo rd, A.D ., Th iry, E., Tr uyen, U., tionsi ncat s,bef ore anda fter beingp laced inshe lters,wit hemp hasis
Horzinek , M .C., 2009 . Felin e infectio us pe ritonit is. A BCD gu ide- onfel in eent ericcor ona virus. J.Feli neMed .S urg.6(2) ,83– 88.
linesonp reven tionan dman agement.J. FelineMed .Surg. 11(7), Peders en,N.C .,2009 .Areviewof fe linein fectio uspe rit onit isvirusinfec-
594– 604 . tion:1 963– 2008. J. FelineM e d.Surg .11(4).
Addie,D.D.,McLachlan,S.A.,Golder,M.,Ramsey,I.,Jarrett,O.,2004.Eval- Pesteanu -Somogyi, L .D ., Radz ai, C. , Pres sle r, B.M., 2006. Prevalence of
ua tiono fanin-prac ticet estforf elin ecoronav ir usantib od ies.J.F eline felineinfectious peri tonitisin sp ecificcat breed s.J.Fel ineMed.Su rg.
Med.S urg .6 (2),63–67. 8(1), 1–5.
Bell,E.T., Malik ,R .,N orris,J.M.,2006.Therelationshipbetweenthefeline Polan d,A .M.,Vennema,H.,Foley,J.E.,Pedersen,N.C.,1996.Tworelated
c oron avirus an tibodyt itrea ndthe age ,breed,gend erandhea lth status stra insof felineinfe ctio uspe riton itisvirus isolat edfro mim muno-
ofAustralian cats.Au st.Ve t.J. 84, 2–7. compro m isedca tsinfected withafeli neen tericcoro navir us.J.Clin.
Benetk a, V., Kub ber-H eiss, A., Ko lod ziejek, J., Nowotny, N., Hofmann- Microbiol.34( 12), 3180–31 84.
Paris ot,M .,Mostl,K.,200 4.P revalenceoff eli necoronav irus typesIand Pratelli,A.,Yes ilb ag,K. ,Siniscalchi,M.,Yalcin,E.,Yilmaz,Z.,2009.Preva-
IIincats wi thhist opa tholo gicallyverifi e dfelin einfectiousp erito n itis. lenc eo ffelinecor on avirusantib odie sincat sin Bursap rov ince,T urkey,
V et. Mic robio l.99,31–42. byan en zyme -linkedimm unosorben t assa y. J.Feli neMed.S urg.11
Brown,M .A.,Troye r,J.L .,Pecon-Slattery,J.,Roelke,M.E.,O’Brien,S.J.,2009. (10 ),8 81–884.
Gen etics andpat hog enesisoffelinei nfe ctiousp erito nitisviru s.E merg. Pratelli,A .,2008.Comparisonofserologictechniquesforthedetectionof
Infect.Di s.15 ,1445–1452. anti bod iesag ainstfeline cor onavirus es.J.Vet.D iagn .In vest.20(1 ),
Can-Sahna ,K., Atas even,V.S.,Pinar,D.,Oguzoglu,T.C.,2007.Thedetection 45–50.
offeline co ronavirus esin blood sa mplesfrom cat sbym RN ART-PCR. Sabshin,S.J.,Levy,J.K.,Tupler,T.,Tucker,S.J.,Greiner,E.C.,Leutenegger,
J.F eline Med.Surg.9,3 69 –372. C.M., 201 2.Ent erop athogen si dentifie din catsente ring aFloridaani-
Cave, T.A.,G older, M.C., Sim pson,J.,Addie,D.D.,2004.Riskfactorsforfeline mals helter withnormalfeces ordiarrhe a. J.Am .Vet.Me d .Assoc. 241,
co rona virusse ropo sitivityin ca tsrelin quis hedto aUK rescu ech arity. 331– 337.
J.FelineMed .Surg.6(2),5 3– 58. Sharif,S.,Arshad,S.S.,Hair-Bejo,M.,Omar,A.R.,Zeenathul,N.A.,Hafidz,
Dong -Jun,A .,Hye -Youn g ,J., WooSeog,J.,Jee-Yong,P.,Myoung-Heon,L., M. A., 2009.Pr evale nceoffelin eco ronav irusi ntwocatpo pula tionsin
Bong-K yu n,P.,2011. Pr evalenceo fK oreancat sw ithnaturalfeli ne Malay sia.J. FelineMed .S urg.12 ,1031–1034 .
coronavirus inf ection s.Virol.J.8, 45 5. Sharif,S.,Arsh a d,S.S., Hair-B ejo,M .,O mar,A.R.,Zeenathul,N.A.,Alazawy,
Drechsler,Y.,Al caraz,A.,B osson g, F. J.,Collisson,E.W.,Diniz,P.P.,2011. A., 20 10.Diag nos ticmethod sfo rfelin eco ronavirus: arev iew.Vet.
Feline co ronaviru s i n multica t e nvironmen ts. V et. Cli n. N . Am. Me d.Int. 7,28.
Small Anim. Clin. 41 (6), 1133 –1169, http://d x.doi .org/1 0.10 16/j. Shelly,S.M .,S ca rlett-Kranz,J.,Blue,J.T.,1988.Proteinelectrophoresison
cvsm. 2011.08 .004. effu sion sfromcatsasad ia gnost icte stforf elineinf ectiousperitoni tis.
Dye,C.,Helps,C.R.,Siddell,S.G.,2008.Evaluationofreal-timeRT-PCRfor J.Am.Ani m.H osp. As so c.24,495– 500 .
t he quanti ficati onofFC oVs heddin ginthefa ece sofdome sticcat s.J. Spark es,A .H.,Gr uffydd -Jones, T.J. ,Harbour,D.A.,1994.Anappraisalofthe
Feli neMed.Surg.1 0 (2),16 7–174. value ofla boratorytestsin the diagnosi soff elinei nfe ctiousper ito ni-
Foley,J.E., Polan d,A., Ca rlso n,J.,Pedersen,N.C.,1997.Patternsoffeline tis.J.A m .Anim.Ho sp.As so c.3 0,345.
co rona virusin fec tionand fe calsheddi ngfr omca tsinmu ltip le-cat Sparkes , A.H., Gruffy dd-Jon es,T.J. ,Ha rbour,D.A.,1992.Felinecoronavirus
environmen ts.J.Am.V et.M ed.A ssoc.210, 1307 –131 2. antib odie sinUKcats.Vet. Rec .131,223 –224 .
Greiner,M.,Gardn er ,I.A. ,200 0.Ap plicatio nof diagnostictestsinveteri- Taharaguchi,S .,S oma ,T.,H ara ,M., 2012 .Prevalenceoffelinecoronavirus
nary epi demiolog icst udies. Prev.Vet.M ed .45(1–2),4 3–59 . antibodie si nJapa nes edom est iccat sduringthe p astde cade.J.Vet.
Gunn-Mo ore,D.A.,Gru ffydd-Jo nes,T .J.,H arbo ur, D.A.,1 998.Detection Med.Sci.7 4,1 355–135 8.
of feline coron aviruses by cult ure and rever se tra nscrip tase poly- Taylor,S.S .,Ta ppi n,S.W.,Dodkin,S.J.,Papasouliotis,K.,Casamian-Sorrosal,
m erase chain reaction of blood s amp les from healthy cat s and D., Task er,S.,20 10.Se rumpro tein electrophore sis in155cats.J.Feline
cats wi th clin ical felin e in fectiou s periton itis. V et. Micr obiol . 62, Me d.Surg. 12 ,643– 653.
193– 205. Tsai,H.Y. ,Chue h,L .L.,Lin,C.N.,Su,B.L.,2011.Clinicopathologicalfindings
Hartmann,K.,2005.Felineinfectiousperitonitis.Vet.Clin.NorthAm.Small a nddi seasest agin gof felin ein fecti ouspe ritonitis:51casesfro m2003
Anim.P ra ct35( 1),39– 79. to2 009inT aiwan.J .F elineM ed.Surg. 13,74–80.
Hartmann ,K.,B ind er,C .,Hirschberger,J.,Cole,D.,Reinacher,M.,Schroo, Venne ma,H .,1 999.Ge ne ticshi ftand drift dur ingfelinecoronavirusevo-
S.,Fros t,J. ,Egberin k, H.,Lutz,H.,He rm anns ,W .,2003.Com pa risonof lution. Ve t.Micr obiol.69 ,139 –14 1.
dif ferent te ststodia gno sefel ine infectious peri tonitis .J.Vet.Inter n. Vijaykrishn a,D .,Smith,G.J .,Zh ang,J.X.,Peiris,J.S.,Chen,H.,Guan,Y.,2007.
Med.17( 6),78 1– 790. Evolution ary insigh tsin tothe eco logyof cor onavi rus es.J.V iro l.81,
Herreweg h, A.A. ,Mahler,M.,Hedrich,H.J.,Haagmans,B.L.,Egberink,H.F., 4012–4020.
Horzine k,M. C.,Rottie r,P .J.,deGro ot,R .J.,1997.Pe rsist enceand evo- Villiers,E.,Blackwood,L.(Eds.),2005.BSAVAManualofCanineandFeline
lutionoff eline coronav irus in aclose dca t-bree dingcolony. Viro logy Clin ica lPathology. Br itishS mallA nim.V et.Assoc .,G louces ter, UK.
234(2 ),3 49–36 3. Vogel,L.,Va nderLubbe n,M.,T elinte lo,E.G .,Bek ker,C.P .,Geerts,T., Schui-
Holst,B .S.,E nglund,L.,Palacios,S.,Renstrom,L.,Berndtsson,L.T.,2006. jff, L. S.,G rinw is,G.C. ,Eg berink,H .F.,R ottier,P .J.,2 010.Pa th ogenic
Pr evale nceofant ibo diesagai nst felinecoron av irusandChla myd ophila cha ract eristicso fpers istentfeli neen tericco rona virus infectionin
felisinSwe dis hcats.J.Fe lineMe d.Sur g.8,207–21 1. cats.Vet.Res.4 1, 71.
Kipar,A .,M ay,H.,M enge r, S.,Web er,M .,Leu ke rt,W.,Reinacher,M.,2005. Worthin g,K., Wig ney ,D.,Dhand,N.,Fawcett,Q.A.,McDonagh,P.,Malik,
M orp holog ica lfeature san ddeve lopm entofg ran ulomatous vasc ulitis K.R.,N orr is,J.,201 2. Riskfac tors forfelin einf ectiousperi ton itisin
infelineinfecti ousperit onit is.Vet.Pathol .4 2,321–330. Aust ralianca ts .J.Feli neM ed.Surg .14 ,405– 412.