Leishmania infantum: Canine Visceral Leishmaniasis, Sandfly Transmission, Zoonosis, and Diagnosis

Introduction

Canine visceral leishmaniasis (CVL) is a severe, progressive, and often fatal multisystemic disease caused by the protozoan parasite Leishmania infantum (syn. Leishmania chagasi) [1, 2]. The domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) serves as the primary peridomestic reservoir for this zoonotic pathogen, playing a central role in the maintenance and expansion of transmission cycles in urban and peri-urban environments [3, 57]. The disease is endemic across the Mediterranean Basin, North Africa, the Middle East, West Asia, and South America, with expanding foci into previously non-endemic regions of the Northern Hemisphere driven by climate change, increased travel, and dog importation [1, 4, 54]. Understanding the biophysical and ecological mechanisms of sandfly transmission, the molecular basis of host-parasite interactions, and the diagnostic principles underlying current detection methods is essential for veterinary practitioners and epidemiologists.

Etiology and Parasite Biology

Leishmania infantum is a digenetic, obligate intracellular protozoan belonging to the family Trypanosomatidae [1]. The parasite exists in two principal morphological forms: the flagellated, motile promastigote, which develops within the alimentary tract of the phlebotomine sandfly vector, and the non-flagellated, round amastigote, which resides and replicates within phagolysosomes of mammalian macrophages [1, 5]. The kinetoplast, a specialized mitochondrial DNA structure, is a key diagnostic feature observed in Giemsa-stained tissue imprints [6, 7]. Phylogenetic analyses based on small subunit ribosomal DNA (SSUrDNA) and glycosomal glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (gGAPDH) gene sequences confirm that isolates from dogs in endemic regions cluster with L. infantum reference strains [2, 7]. The species L. infantum is genetically and taxonomically synonymous with L. chagasi in the Americas, a designation supported by cytochrome b gene sequencing [7].

Sandfly Transmission and Vector Ecology

Transmission of L. infantum occurs almost exclusively through the bite of an infected female phlebotomine sandfly [1, 5]. In the Americas, the principal vector is Lutzomyia longipalpis, a species highly adapted to peridomestic environments [3, 49, 87]. In the Mediterranean Basin, North Africa, and parts of Asia, vectors belong to the subgenus Phlebotomus (Larroussius), including Phlebotomus perniciosus, Phlebotomus neglectus, and Phlebotomus mascittii [54, 114, 117]. Other sandfly species, such as Nyssomyia neivai in southern Brazil and Pintomyia fischeri in the metropolitan region of São Paulo, have been implicated as potential vectors based on detection of L. infantum DNA and isolation of promastigotes [8, 88, 125].

The transmission cycle begins when a female sandfly ingests blood from an infected mammalian host, taking up amastigote-laden macrophages [1]. In the sandfly midgut, amastigotes transform into promastigotes, which undergo a series of developmental stages, including procyclic, nectomonad, leptomonad, and finally metacyclic promastigotes [1]. Metacyclic promastigotes are the infective stage, migrating to the sandfly proboscis. During subsequent blood feeding, the sandfly regurgitates metacyclic promastigotes into the dermis of a new host [1]. Promastigotes are then phagocytosed by resident macrophages, where they transform into amastigotes and replicate within parasitophorous vacuoles [1, 5].

Several ecological and behavioral factors enhance transmission efficiency. Dogs infected with L. infantum produce volatile chemical profiles that are attractive to female sandflies, a phenomenon suggestive of parasite manipulation of host odor to increase vector attraction [79, 98]. Synthetic sex-aggregation pheromones of Lu. longipalpis have been shown to attract both males and females over long distances, and co-location of such pheromones with insecticide reduces infection incidence in canine reservoirs [87, 96]. Sandfly feeding preferences are influenced by host availability; studies have detected L. infantum DNA in sandflies that fed on chickens, indicating that non-mammalian hosts may contribute to vector population maintenance. The presence of peridomestic barriers, such as masonry walls, reduces the odds of canine seropositivity by limiting dog access to street environments where vector exposure is higher [3].

Zoonotic Significance and Reservoir Hosts

Leishmania infantum is a zoonotic pathogen, with dogs acting as the principal reservoir for human visceral leishmaniasis (VL) [1, 57]. In urban settings, the presence of infected dogs is a key risk factor for human infection [3, 5]. The parasite is also maintained in sylvatic cycles involving wild canids, such as the crab-eating fox (Cerdocyon thous), and lagomorphs, including wild rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), which serve as reservoir hosts in certain Mediterranean ecosystems [59, 74, 115]. Cats have been increasingly recognized as potential reservoirs; L. infantum strains isolated from cats are biologically similar to canine and human strains, and transmission from cats to dogs has been experimentally demonstrated [45, 73, 85, 99]. Other domestic mammals, including ferrets (Mustela putorius furo), have been found seropositive in endemic areas, though their epidemiological role remains unclear. The detection of L. infantum DNA in captive wild mammals in urban zoos further highlights the breadth of potential hosts [9].

Non-vectorial transmission routes have been documented. Vertical transmission from pregnant dams to puppies occurs, and studies have demonstrated that vertically infected dogs exhibit significant skin tropism, making them infectious to sandfly vectors [10, 70]. Direct dog-to-dog transmission through biting or contact with contaminated blood has been proposed, particularly in the context of outbreaks in foxhounds in North America [11, 12]. Transstadial and transovarial transmission of L. infantum by Rhipicephalus sanguineus ticks has been reported under experimental conditions, but the epidemiological relevance of this route is uncertain.

Clinical Manifestations in Dogs

The clinical presentation of CVL is highly variable, ranging from subclinical infection to severe multisystemic disease [13, 1]. The incubation period can last from months to years. Common clinical signs include lymphadenomegaly, splenomegaly, progressive weight loss, muscle atrophy, onychogryphosis (abnormal nail growth), and non-pruritic exfoliative dermatitis, particularly on the face, ears, and limbs [1, 11]. Renal involvement is frequent and often manifests as protein-losing nephropathy, which can progress to chronic kidney failure [1, 14]. Ocular lesions, including keratoconjunctivitis and uveitis, are also observed [1]. Epistaxis and other bleeding tendencies may occur due to thrombocytopenia or vasculitis [1]. The severity of clinical signs correlates with parasite load and the host immune response, particularly the balance between Th1 (protective) and Th2 (non-protective) cytokine profiles [63, 81].

Diagnostic Approaches

Accurate diagnosis of CVL is critical for clinical management and epidemiological surveillance. A combination of serological, molecular, and parasitological methods is recommended to maximize sensitivity and specificity [1, 15].

Serological Methods

Serological detection of anti-Leishmania antibodies is the most widely used approach in field surveys and control programs [3, 13]. The indirect immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are standard serological techniques [3, 16, 6]. IFAT uses whole promastigotes as antigen, with titers of 1:80 or higher considered positive in many endemic regions [3]. Commercial ELISA kits, often employing recombinant antigens such as rK39 or rK26, offer improved specificity and are used in screening algorithms [13, 17]. The Dual Path Platform (DPP) immunochromatographic test is a rapid serological screening tool used in some national control programs [13, 6]. However, serological tests cannot reliably distinguish between active infection and past exposure, and they may fail to identify infectious dogs with low antibody titers [94, 113]. Seasonal variation in anti-Leishmania antibody titers has been documented, with higher titers observed during periods of increased sandfly activity [46, 78].

Molecular Methods

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) provide high sensitivity and specificity for detection of L. infantum DNA [13, 2, 18]. Common target sequences include the kinetoplast DNA (kDNA) minicircle, the small subunit ribosomal RNA (SSU rRNA) gene, and the cathepsin L-like gene [2, 18, 11]. Real-time PCR assays using kDNA-targeted primers have demonstrated superior sensitivity compared to conventional PCR, particularly in asymptomatic dogs with low parasitemia [13, 18]. In one study, qPCR detected Leishmania DNA in 71% of seropositive dogs, with 100% positivity among symptomatic animals but only 63.2% among asymptomatic seropositive dogs [13]. This finding underscores the limitation of serology alone for identifying truly infected animals.

Sample types for molecular diagnosis include peripheral blood, bone marrow, lymph node aspirates, skin biopsies, and conjunctival swabs [13, 16, 18, 51]. Conjunctival swab qPCR has emerged as a minimally invasive and highly sensitive method for detecting L. infantum DNA [18]. Parasite load in blood and skin correlates with infectiousness to sandfly vectors, making qPCR a useful tool for assessing transmission risk [127, 128]. Sequencing of PCR amplicons, particularly the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS1) region or the cytochrome b gene, allows definitive species identification and phylogenetic analysis [16, 7, 18].

Parasitological Methods

Direct microscopic examination of Giemsa-stained tissue imprints or smears from bone marrow, spleen, or lymph nodes can reveal amastigotes, characterized by their round shape, nucleus, and rod-shaped kinetoplast [6, 7]. Parasitological culture in axenic media allows isolation of promastigotes, but sensitivity is lower than molecular methods [16]. Histopathological examination of skin or organ biopsies may also reveal amastigotes within macrophages [19, 11].

Diagnostic Algorithm

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates a recommended diagnostic workflow for CVL in endemic areas.

flowchart TD
 A[Clinical suspicion or screening] --> B{"'Serological screening<br>(DPP or ELISA')"}
 B -->|Positive| C{"'Confirmatory serology<br>(IFAT or ELISA')"}
 B -->|Negative| D["Low probability of infection;<br>consider molecular testing if high suspicion"]
 C -->|Positive| E{"'Molecular confirmation<br>(qPCR on blood or conjunctival swab')"}
 C -->|Negative| D
 E -->|Positive| F["Confirmed CVL diagnosis;<br>assess clinical stage and parasite load"]
 E -->|Negative| G["Seropositive but no detectable DNA;<br>possible low parasitemia or cross-reaction;<br>repeat testing or use alternative tissue"]

Differential Diagnosis

The clinical signs of CVL overlap with those of other chronic infectious and non-infectious diseases. Differential diagnoses include ehrlichiosis (caused by Ehrlichia canis), anaplasmosis, babesiosis, systemic fungal infections (e.g., histoplasmosis), and immune-mediated diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus [1, 14]. Co-infections with other trypanosomatids, such as Crithidia fasciculata, have been detected in dogs in endemic areas and may complicate serological interpretation [18]. The use of species-specific molecular assays is essential for accurate differentiation.

Prevention and Control

Prevention of CVL relies on reducing vector exposure and, where available, vaccination. Insecticide-impregnated collars containing deltamethrin or permethrin reduce sandfly feeding on dogs and have been shown to decrease the incidence of infection in both dogs and humans in community intervention trials [20, 55, 60, 97]. Topical spot-on formulations containing pyrethroids also provide protection [21, 20, 69]. Systemic insecticides, such as afoxolaner, have demonstrated efficacy in preventing L. infantum transmission in highly endemic areas. Vaccines against CVL have been developed and are used in some endemic countries, although their efficacy is limited and they do not provide sterile immunity [1, 53, 92]. Environmental management, including removal of organic matter that provides breeding sites for sandflies and use of fine-mesh screens, reduces peridomestic vector populations [3, 5]. Public health education regarding responsible dog ownership and the importance of barrier measures is critical for sustained control [3, 22].

Conclusion

Leishmania infantum remains a major zoonotic pathogen of veterinary and public health importance. The domestic dog is the key peridomestic reservoir, and sandfly vectors drive transmission in endemic and expanding regions. Diagnosis requires a combination of serological and molecular methods, with qPCR providing the highest sensitivity for detecting active infection and assessing infectiousness. Continued surveillance, vector control, and development of more effective vaccines are essential to reduce the burden of CVL and its zoonotic impact.

References

[1] Morales-Yuste M, Martín-Sánchez J, Corpas-López V. Canine Leishmaniasis: Update on Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention. Vet Sci. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/676be6b4eabc064f136aa4d74e771e87b6d5c43c

[2] Marcili A, Silva RE, Costa V, et al. Canine Visceral Leishmaniasis in São Paulo, Brazil, the Most Populous City of South America: Isolation, Molecular Diagnosis, and Phylogenetic Inferences. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bf9edd1e5db710f8fab85578d6f346557196c25e

[3] Veloso ECM, Negreiros AS, Silva JP, et al. Socio-economic and environmental factors associated with the occurrence of canine infection by Leishmania infantum in Teresina, Brazil. Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7a107390f6299834f49778299193b8dda7c8b1e1

[4] Mencke N. The importance of canine leishmaniosis in non-endemic areas, with special emphasis on the situation in Germany. Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2011. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22191164/

[5] Chabchoub I. Visceral leishmaniasis: clinical and therapeutic aspects. 2018. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2bbfff5d844283668c4730da102d9d7374e00d46

[6] Faria MT, Barbosa FS, Teixeira-Neto RG, et al. Autochthonous case of Canine Visceral Leishmaniasis in a non-endemic area in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Pesqui Vet Bras. 2017. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5b82bcd61b3e6bb013aad7f76bd40fb1b0b46f7d

[7] Barrio A, Parodi C, Locatelli F, et al. Leishmania infantum and Human Visceral Leishmaniasis, Argentina. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8aa95d45283d34d059cf06192a0fd6103246ee9

[8] Cardoso SF, Guesser JVC, Rodrigues AAF, et al. Leishmania infantum detection in Nyssomyia neivai and dogs in Southern Brazil. Parasit Vectors. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38918858/

[9] Pereira NCL, Michalsky ÉM, de Avelar DM, et al. Detection of Leishmania infantum DNA in captive wild mammals from an urban zoo in a visceral leishmaniasis-endemic area of Brazil. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41860882/

[10] Duxbury KR, Richer LM, Petersen CA. Sire risk factors for vertical transmission of Leishmania infantum by the dam. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42081512/

[11] Kawamura Y, Yoshikawa I, Katakura K. Imported Leishmaniasis in Dogs, US Military Bases, Japan. Emerg Infect Dis. 2010. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6a7c061eaf6081f24d8d20fd3325ad4bf1d9ac42

[12] Schaut RG, Robles-Murguia M, Juelsgaard R, et al. Vectorborne Transmission of Leishmania infantum from Hounds, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26583260/

[13] Monteiro FM, Machado AS, Rocha-Silva F, et al. Canine visceral leishmaniasis: Detection of Leishmania spp. genome in peripheral blood of seropositive dogs by real-time polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR). Microb Pathog. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f5348ee51fbbc641c5e7e60ee06ebdefc10ba638

[14] Gravino AE. Interpretation of laboratory data during cryptic leishmaniasis in dog. Parassitologia. 2004. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/678d109afc606651e35aecf134c8c56bf484a01a

[15] Schäfer I, Müller E, Naucke TJ. Canine leishmaniosis: an update regarding diagnostics, therapeutic approaches, and monitoring. Tierarztl Prax Ausg K Kleintiere Heimtiere. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36516843/

[16] Sousa V, Dias Á, Rodrigues J, et al. Canine visceral leishmaniasis in riverside communities of the Cuiabá river watershed. Semina: Ciências Agrárias. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/11fa4c56acd7d9e4a120cd751af0fc800ecd89f9

[17] Braz BMA, Leite D, Silva R, et al. Factors associated with Leishmania infection in dogs and geospatial analysis in the Sertão of Paraíba, Northeast Brazil. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4fd57b4711e620d8e85957bda06a428db208a8fa

[18] Pereira VF. Identificação e caracterização de tripanossomatídeos que infectam cães em área endêmica para leishmaniose visceral canina. 2016. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a36d351bc76a4764f93c8680eb88f5e9b1909658

[19] Boechat VC. Ocorrência de Leishmania infantum e alterações histológicas associadas no trato genital e glândula mamária de cães naturalmente infectados. 2015. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/03f2e3fcddc27b8e40540b40bba10420312b58e0

[20] Ferroglio E, Poggi M, Trisciuoglio A. Evaluation of 65% permethrin spot-on and deltamethrin-impregnated collars for canine Leishmania infantum infection prevention. Zoonoses Public Health. 2008. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18331517/

[21] Reithinger R. Topical insecticides control Leishmania reservoir dogs. 2002. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ee1737da6151a75b0b404d5d8bd5ca9bbaa2a99a

[22] Paulan SC, Silva D, Lins A, et al. O conhecimento sobre leishmaniose visceral: Suficiente para controle e prevenção? Rev Ciênc Ext. 2016. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/657451a23d784a4c7f10e6f831733bc486aa8f1b

[23] Oliveira IQ. Triagem dos antígenos recombinantes de leishmania infantum utilizando a técnica de multi-antígenos impressos (mapia) no desenvolvimento de imunodiagnóstico para leishmaniose visceral canina. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/434fa1a867345bf4f10ef33fd448cf2459bd37e6

[24] Vexenat JA. The epidemiology of visceral leishmaniasis in Teresina, Piaui State, Brazil, with special emphasis on diagnosis and transmissibility of canine infection. 1998. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aaead75b13c0f9cbbca61be54e3262781d574081

[25] Corrêa K. Análise geoespacial da distribuição de flebotomíneos e cães com leishmaniose visceral no município de Angra dos Reis. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e11abbea12c7de407f02bbb930b648f4dfa0d3b0

[26] Spinelli RM. Comparação de metodologias diagnósticas para leishmaniose visceral em cães domésticos provenientes de área de baixa transmissão nas cidades de Niterói e Maricá, Rio de Janeiro. 2018. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1719fec91b97562834c98b6ad9bae653e9b2f3b0

[27] Torres MT, Sánchez ASM. Leishmaniasis canina en Venezuela: un problema de salud pública. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/efc9861c81c444ea25c383dd8786bf166ed793c2

[28] Silva FDO. Ecoepidemiologia e Controle da Leishmaniose Visceral no município de Belo Horizonte (Minas Gerais, Brasil). 2015. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/13e07d2f66c5fa46ca26857a46de4d87722bf877

[29] Maubon D, Thurot-Guillou C, Ravel C, et al. Leishmania killicki Imported from Tunisian Desert. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0bb92c193d11b79fc32b6eda22a1ec3fccf8bc7e

[30] Uranw S, Dujardin B, Boelaert M, et al. Kala-azar in Nepal: public health evidence to support the elimination initiative. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ac5c72baf906408392c0cf2a9ebdeb5f5836366

[31] Rodrigues AAF. Avaliação do papel epidemiológico das Leishmanioses em Comunidades Inseridas em Área de Preservação Ambiental, Parque Estadual da Serra da Tiririca, Niterói e Maricá, RJ, Brasil. 2016. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5da6fcf30302f2f969ef4c7038ba11e50a7da963

[32] Manathunga T, Barrs V, Han Q, et al. Zoonotic leishmaniasis in China: Current status and challenges to elimination. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42166495/

[33] Duthie MS, Lison A, Courtenay O. Advances toward Diagnostic Tools for Managing Zoonotic Visceral Leishmaniasis. Trends Parasitol. 2018. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30131210/

[34] Aoun K, Laamrani El Idrissi A, Harrat Z, et al. Meeting "Visceral leishmaniasis in Maghreb", 2-4 April 2015 in Tunis. Recommendations. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26002086/

[35] Zait H, Ferhani Y, Achir I, et al. Study of 71 cases of visceral leishmaniasis diagnosed at the Mustapha University Hospital (Algiers) from 1998 to 2009. Med Mal Infect. 2012. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22341665/

[36] Shang LM, Peng WP, Jin HT, et al. The prevalence of canine Leishmania infantum infection in Sichuan Province, southwestern China detected by real time PCR. Parasit Vectors. 2011. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21910882/

[37] Morosetti G, Bongiorno G, Beran B, et al. Risk assessment for canine leishmaniasis spreading in the north of Italy. Geospat Health. 2009. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19908194/

[38] Marty P, Pomares-Estran C, Hasseine L, et al. Leishmaniases in France: an update. Arch Pediatr. 2009. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19836685/

[39] Tok H, Sevil N, Ozensoy Töz S, et al. The serological and entomological survey of zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis in Ayvacik Region of Canakkale Province, Turkey. Turkiye Parazitol Derg. 2009. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19598084/

Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for professional veterinary advice, diagnosis, treatment, or regulatory guidance. Always consult a licensed veterinarian or qualified specialist regarding animal health, disease diagnosis, and therapeutic decisions.