Dee Scott A, Deen John, Cano Jean Paul, Batista Laura, Pijoan Carlos
Swine Disease Eradication Center, University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine, St Paul 55108, USA.
Can J Vet Res. 2006 Jul;70(3):168-75.
The purpose of this study was to compare 4 methods for the reduction of aerosol transmission of Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV): high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration, 2x-low-cost filtration, bag filtration, and use of a filter tested against particles derived from dioctylphthalate (DOP). The HEPA-filtration system used a prefilter screen, a bag filter (Eurovent [EU] 8 rating), and a HEPA filter (EU13 rating). The low-cost-filtration system contained mosquito netting (prefilter), 2 fiberglass furnace filters, and 2 electrostatic furnace filters. Bag filtration involved the use of a filter rated EU8 and a minimum efficiency reporting value (MERV) of 14. The 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm-filtration system involved a pleat-in-pleat V-bank disposable filter with a 95% efficiency rating for particles 0.3 microm or greater in diameter and ratings of EU9 and MERV 15. No form of intervention was used in the control group. The experimental facilities consisted of 2 chambers connected by a 1.3-m-long duct containing the treatments. Recipient pigs, housed in chamber 2, were exposed to artificial aerosols created by a mechanically operated mister containing modified live PRRSV vaccine located in chamber 1. Aerosol transmission of PRRSV occurred in 0 of the 10 HEPA-filtration replicates, 2 of the 10 bag-filtration replicates, 4 of the 10 low-cost-filtration replicates, 0 of the 10 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm-filtration replicates, and all 10 of the control replicates. Using a similar approach, we further evaluated the HEPA- and 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm-filtration systems. Infection was not observed in any of the 76 HEPA-filtration replicates but was observed in 2 of the 76 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm replicates and 42 of the 50 control replicates. Although the difference between the 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm and control replicates was significant (P < 0.0005), so was the level of failure of the 95%-DOP, 0.3-microm system (P = 0.02). In conclusion, under the conditions of this study, some methods of air filtration were significantly better than others in reducing aerosol transmission of PRRSV, and HEPA filtration was the only system that completely prevented transmission.
本研究的目的是比较4种减少猪繁殖与呼吸综合征病毒(PRRSV)气溶胶传播的方法:高效空气过滤器(HEPA)过滤、2倍低成本过滤、袋式过滤以及使用针对邻苯二甲酸二辛酯(DOP)衍生颗粒进行测试的过滤器。HEPA过滤系统使用了预滤网、袋式过滤器(欧洲通风标准[EU]8级)和HEPA过滤器(EU13级)。低成本过滤系统包含蚊帐(预滤网)、2个玻璃纤维炉用过滤器和2个静电炉用过滤器。袋式过滤使用了一个额定为EU8且最低效率报告值(MERV)为14的过滤器。95%-DOP、0.3微米过滤系统使用了一种层层折叠的V型组合式一次性过滤器,对直径0.3微米及以上的颗粒的过滤效率为95%,额定等级为EU9和MERV 15。对照组未采用任何形式的干预措施。实验设施由2个腔室组成,通过一条1.3米长的管道相连,管道内装有各种处理装置。饲养在腔室2中的受体猪暴露于由位于腔室1中的机械操作喷雾器产生的人工气溶胶中,该喷雾器含有改良活PRRSV疫苗。在10次HEPA过滤重复实验中,PRRSV气溶胶传播发生0次;在10次袋式过滤重复实验中发生2次;在10次低成本过滤重复实验中发生4次;在10次95%-DOP、0.3微米过滤重复实验中发生0次;在10次对照重复实验中全部发生。采用类似方法,我们进一步评估了HEPA和95%-DOP、0.3微米过滤系统。在76次HEPA过滤重复实验中均未观察到感染,但在76次95%-DOP、0.3微米重复实验中有2次观察到感染,在50次对照重复实验中有42次观察到感染。尽管95%-DOP、0.3微米重复实验与对照重复实验之间的差异具有显著性(P < 0.0005),但95%-DOP、0.3微米系统的失败率也具有显著性(P = 0.02)。总之,在本研究条件下,某些空气过滤方法在减少PRRSV气溶胶传播方面明显优于其他方法,HEPA过滤是唯一能完全防止传播的系统。