Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T08:08:07.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Transmission dynamics and control options for Echinococcus granulosus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2004

P. R. TORGERSON
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, University of Zurich, Winterthurestrasse 266a, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland
D. D. HEATH
Affiliation:
AgResearch Limited, Wallaceville Animal Research Centre, Ward Street, PO Box 40063, Upper Hutt, New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cystic echinococcosis, caused by the larval stage of Echinococcus granulosus, is a global public health problem. Whilst in a few localities, such as New Zealand, the parasite has been effectively controlled or even eradicated, in most endemic regions it remains a persistent problem. In some areas, such as the former Soviet Union, the disease incidence in humans has increased rapidly in recent years. It is important to have an understanding of the transmission dynamics, both between dogs and domestic livestock where the parasite maintains itself and from dogs to people. It is from this knowledge that effective control measures can be devised to reduce the prevalence of the parasite in animals and hence reduce the incidence of human disease. Mathematical models to describe the transmission of the parasite and the effects of different control strategies were first proposed over twenty years ago. Since then further information has been acquired, new technology has been developed and better computing technology has become available. In this review, we summarise these developments and put together a theoretical framework on the interpretation of surveillance information, how this affects transmission and how this information can be exploited to develop new intervention strategies for the control of the parasite. In particular, the parasite remains a persistent or re-emerging problem in countries of low economic output where resources for an intensive control programme, that has been successful in rich countries, are not available. By understanding of the transmission biology, including mathematical modelling, alternative and cost-effective means of control can be developed.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Transmission of Echinococcus granulosus between dogs, sheep and man. © Institute of Parasitology, University of Zurich.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Taeniid eggs recovered per cm2 from a dog experimentally infected with Taenia hydatigena. © Institute of Parasitology, University of Zurich.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Variation in prevalence of E. granulosus and the proportion of dogs susceptible to infection with age. Top: 0·44 infections each year and the absence of immunity on exposure. Middle: infection pressure of 2 infections per year with an 80% probability of immunity on exposure and 20% probability of loss of immunity each year. Bottom: 0·44 infection every year with a 0·30 probability of immunity on exposure and 0·02 probability of loss of immunity (MLE estimates of farm dogs from Kazakhstan). All simulations assume a parasite life expectancy of about 1 year.

Figure 3

Table 1. Transmission parameters of E. granulosus to intermediate hosts reported from various studies. Transmission is to sheep except where otherwise stated

Figure 4

Table 2. Infection rates by age in Yaks in Sichuan. (Information obtained from the Sichuan Institute of Parasitic Diseases, through Qiu Jiamin)

Figure 5

Table 3. Negative binomial constant k for the aggregation of infection in various reported dog populations. If the data from Parada et al. (1995) are treated as an outlier, there is a highly significant correlation between prevalence and k (correlation coefficient=0·93, P<0·001)

Figure 6

Table 4. Suggested base-line parameters for sheep and dogs in Kazakhstan

Figure 7

Table 5. Modelling control through changes in the parameters

Figure 8

Table 6. Options for hydatid control, and assessment of the likely cost/benefit ratio per year per family of a combined approach using dog-treatments and vaccination