Comparing vaginal douche, cervicovaginal mucus, and uterine lavage for diagnosis of Tritrichomonas foetus in naive heifers exposed to a naturally infected bull.
Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of quantitative PCR (qPCR) in detecting Tritrichomonas foetus from 3 sample types-vaginal douche, cervicovaginal mucus, and low-volume uterine lavage-in naïve heifers exposed to a naturally infected bull. Methods: 11 naïve heifers were exposed for 30 days to a bull naturally infected with T foetus. Three sampling locations were used to collect diagnostic-material vaginal douche, cervical mucus aspirate, and low-volume uterine lavage and submitted for qPCR. Three sampling time periods were performed 21 days apart. Results: 12 out of the 82 samples (14.6%) were positive on qPCR. Positive samples were acquired from 2 of 11 heifers. Time significantly impacted the sample positivity results, while location did not. Conclusions: The small design of the study could not detect a difference between sampling locations. Two animals that tested positive were negative by day 51, suggesting that testing should occur prior to this day. Clinical Relevance: Recommendations for diagnostic sampling in the female for T foetus are scarce. Sampling from the vagina using a vaginal douche is subjectively easier and results in positive samples. Sampling from the vagina avoids having to traverse the cervix for sample collection, which can be challenging.
Authors
- J. H. Koziol
- Chance L. Armstrong
- Jessica L. Klabnik (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4843-6498)
- Alexis C. Thompson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4405-5313)
- Dane W. Schwartz
- Jessica Rush
Institutions
- Texas Tech University (US)
- West Texas A&M University (US)
- Auburn University (US)
- Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (US)
- Amarillo College (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- PubMed
- Published
- 2026-04-15
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.25.10.0707
- Primary Topic
- Reproductive tract infections research
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00