CONSENSUS STATEMENT ON THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL SITUATION AND EXPECTED FREQUENCY OF CANINE VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES IN SERBIA

<jats:p>nema</jats:p>

The current issue of Veterinarski Glasnik (Vol 74, No 2) is dedicated to canine vectorborne pathogens (VBP) and vector-borne diseases (VBD) in Serbia. All published reviews and original papers indicate the amount of research done in Serbia and the amount of collected and analysed data is high for the majority of topics, inviting us to summarise all the findings in a consensus statement that we hope will be of importance for practitioners who are in constant contact with dogs in Serbia and for researchers who should continue to develop this field of investigation.
For every VBP/VBD, the following data were retrieved mainly from articles published in this issue of Veterinarski Glasnik, and Table 1 was created based on the epidemiological situation, (sero)prevalence, and classification of the risk areas.
1. The epidemiological situation was defined using a modified framework developed by Braks et al. (2011): a. Local transmission -autochthonous cases occurred every year (frequent) or sporadically (rare). b. Pathogen was detected and described in hosts (dogs) and/or vectors. c. Vector was detected and described.
The presence of the VBP in a competent vector is a prerequisite to expect the possible local transmission and infection of dogs. For the minority of selected pathogens, this feature is not yet confirmed. The information about autochthonous clinical cases was retrieved from peer-reviewed articles in all but one case: an autochthonous Leishmania spp. case in a dog (Bekvalac and Fenjac, 2016) was published in a SASAP bulletin -designed for continuing education of veterinary practitioners in Serbia. Also, the presence of Leishmania spp. in wild canids was taken into consideration as proof the pathogen is already autochthonous (Ćirović et al., 2014). Similarly, a high prevalence (61.2%) of Hepatozoon canis in wild canids (red foxes) (Juwaid et al., 2019) was reported, while the expected frequency of clinical disease in dogs was estimated. 2. The data on (sero)prevalence were chosen to represent the whole range of available data, from the lowest to the highest percentage. These data vary according to the diagnostic assays used and geographical region of the country; we stress mainly the Northern and Southern Serbia regions have been investigated. For Dirofilaria spp., prevalence based on antigen detection was reported. 3. Classification of the risk areas. This classification is defined on a modified framework for classifying an area according to the present risk and other characteristics of disease transmission developed by Domanovic and Giesecke et al. (2012). 4. Finally, the possibility of encountering a specific VBD in dogs is estimated based on all previous data. We used four possible outcomes: a. Not expected -Pathogen and vector are not present; local transmission not recorded; b. Low -Local transmission not recorded, lack of data on pathogens and/or vectors, but seroreactive dogs are present; c. Intermediate -Rare local transmission (autochthonous clinical cases) of VBD is confirmed in Serbia, regardless of whether there is a lack of data on pathogens, vectors, and (sero)prevalence; d. High -Frequent local transmission of VBD is confirmed in Serbia, regardless of whether there is a lack of data on pathogens, vectors, and (sero)prevalence.
In conclusion, our knowledge on VBP/VBD has expanded in the last two decades, and veterinary service has improved due to the efforts of many colleagues. We would like to underline that the majority of existing data were collected from the Vojvodina or Belgrade regions, with a lack of information from other parts of Serbia. Thus, this statement should also be a starting point for more comprehensive and organised research in this field. We hope this consensus statement will help veterinarians in Serbia in the future management of their patients and direct research to fill the present gaps.