tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Vet Microbiol. 2013 Jul 9. pii: S0378-1135(13)00344-1. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.06.029. [Epub ahead of print]
Probability of detecting influenza A virus subtypes H1N1 and H3N2 in individual pig nasal swabs and pen-based oral fluid specimens over time.
Goodell CK, Prickett J, Kittawornrat A, Zhou F, Rauh R, Nelson W, O'Connell C, Burrell A, Wang C, Yoon KJ, Zimmerman JJ.
Source
Department of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010, United States. Electronic address: christa-goodell@idexx.com.
Abstract
The probability of detecting influenza A virus (IAV) by virus isolation (VI), point-of-care (POC) antigen detection, and real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was estimated for pen-based oral fluid (OF) and individual pig nasal swab (NS) specimens. Piglets (n=82) were isolated for 30 days and confirmed negative for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, and IAV infections. A subset (n=28) was vaccinated on day post inoculation (DPI) -42 and -21 with a commercial multivalent vaccine. On DPI 0, pigs were intratracheally inoculated with contemporary isolates of H1N1 (n=35) or H3N2 (n=35) or served as negative controls (n=12). OF (n=370) was collected DPI 0-16 and NS (n=924) DPI 0-6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16. The association between IAV detection and variables of interest (specimen, virus subtype, assay, vaccination status, and DPI) was analyzed by mixed-effect repeated measures logistic regression and the results used to calculate the probability (p?) of detecting IAV in OF and NS over DPI by assay. Vaccination (p-value<0.0001), DPI (p-value<0.0001), and specimen-assay interaction (p-value<0.0001) were significant to IAV detection, but virus subtype was not (p-value=0.89). Vaccination and/or increasing DPI reduced p? for all assays. VI was more successful using NS than OF, but both VI and POC were generally unsuccessful after DPI 6. Overall, rRT-PCR on OF specimens provided the highest p? for the most DPIs, yet significantly different results were observed between the two laboratories independently performing rRT-PCR testing.
Copyright ? 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Influenza A virus, Nasal swabs, Oral fluids, PCR, Swine, Virus isolation
PMID:
23910522
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23910522
Probability of detecting influenza A virus subtypes H1N1 and H3N2 in individual pig nasal swabs and pen-based oral fluid specimens over time.
Goodell CK, Prickett J, Kittawornrat A, Zhou F, Rauh R, Nelson W, O'Connell C, Burrell A, Wang C, Yoon KJ, Zimmerman JJ.
Source
Department of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010, United States. Electronic address: christa-goodell@idexx.com.
Abstract
The probability of detecting influenza A virus (IAV) by virus isolation (VI), point-of-care (POC) antigen detection, and real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was estimated for pen-based oral fluid (OF) and individual pig nasal swab (NS) specimens. Piglets (n=82) were isolated for 30 days and confirmed negative for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, and IAV infections. A subset (n=28) was vaccinated on day post inoculation (DPI) -42 and -21 with a commercial multivalent vaccine. On DPI 0, pigs were intratracheally inoculated with contemporary isolates of H1N1 (n=35) or H3N2 (n=35) or served as negative controls (n=12). OF (n=370) was collected DPI 0-16 and NS (n=924) DPI 0-6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16. The association between IAV detection and variables of interest (specimen, virus subtype, assay, vaccination status, and DPI) was analyzed by mixed-effect repeated measures logistic regression and the results used to calculate the probability (p?) of detecting IAV in OF and NS over DPI by assay. Vaccination (p-value<0.0001), DPI (p-value<0.0001), and specimen-assay interaction (p-value<0.0001) were significant to IAV detection, but virus subtype was not (p-value=0.89). Vaccination and/or increasing DPI reduced p? for all assays. VI was more successful using NS than OF, but both VI and POC were generally unsuccessful after DPI 6. Overall, rRT-PCR on OF specimens provided the highest p? for the most DPIs, yet significantly different results were observed between the two laboratories independently performing rRT-PCR testing.
Copyright ? 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Influenza A virus, Nasal swabs, Oral fluids, PCR, Swine, Virus isolation
PMID:
23910522
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23910522