Last spring, we lost a dog to heartworms which led to congestive heart failure. Our other dog was placed on preventative and has been checked every 6 months to make sure she was heartworm negative.
This week, she had her check up and is now testing positive for heartworm even with the preventative.
The vets answer is to give her some pills for a week and then two injections which I understand are extremely painful to the animal.
I want to know first of all is it possible for her to be heartworm positive even after being on preventative for over a year?
Also, what alternatives are there that are less costly and less painful?
Tags: heartworm alternatives, heartworm prevention, heartworms
1. Yes, but not very often.
2. None, but the injections do not appear to be so painful
Heartworms take along time to develop and do not appear on the test for 3 to 6 months after exposure. It could be the one of the previous tests was not accuarate. Also, sometimes the tests are falsely positive also. All positive tests should be followed up with a second different test to be sure the test is accurate.
Without knowing the dose or the product that was used, it difficult to say. Dogs exposed to heartworms may be positive even though on heartworm medicine in heavily infested areas.
I would do a micrscopic evaluation of blood microfilaria (Knotts test) to see how many are floating around, xray the heart or ultrasound to see how much damage if any has occurred, and then decide which method of treatment will be best for the dog.
I have great success with just giving Ivermectin at higher dosages once a month for 6 months (orally) and then rechecking the tests.
The injections can be painful and unnecessary in many cases.
I have 2 dogs that have been tested heartworm positive and I don’t want to loose my dogs but the vet said that it would be almost $2000.00 to treat them. Is there another alternative to the injections thatw ould work? I have been reading up on so many ideas but I don’t know what is right. Thank you.