ABSTRACT
Generally, the epidemiological information associated with an infected dog relates to lack of or inadequate use of diethylcarbamazine (DEC) and access to infected mosquitos, both in the immediate vicinity and while dogs are in transit through infected areas. Dogs presenting with mild heartworm infection usually have few clinical signs. Usual clinical signs in each individual case are dependent on the extent of pulmonary disease and its effect on the general health of the dog, as well as the specific effects from the cor pulmonale lesions. To confirm the suspected diagnosis of dirofilariasis based on clinical signs and historical factors in each case, a series of diagnostic tests are used. There are few tests that are diagnostic or supportive of canine dirofilariasis. Clinical pathology is supportive, but it is not diagnostic or prognostic. Plasma biochemistry changes are similarly neither diagnostic nor prognostic.
