Opriessnig Tanja, Hemann Michelle, Johnson John K, Heinen Sheila, Giménez-Lirola Luis G, O'Neill Kevin C, Hoang Hai, Yoon Kyoung-Jin, Gottschalk Marcelo, Halbur Patrick G
Department of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2013 Jan;25(1):61-71. doi: 10.1177/1040638712469607. Epub 2013 Jan 4.
Accurate diagnosis of exposure to Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae is important for maintaining negative farms. In the present study, the ability of a dual-plate complement fixation (CF) assay and 3 commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs; quad-plate ELISA-1, single-plate ELISA-2, and single-plate ELISA-3) in detecting serological evidence of A. pleuropneumoniae exposure was compared using serum samples of experimentally infected or vaccinated pigs, or field samples from the United States. Forty-two pigs were divided into groups of 2 pigs and were inoculated with 1 of 15 A. pleuropneumoniae strains representing all known serovars of A. pleuropneumoniae, or with Actinobacillus suis, or were vaccinated with a bacterin containing A. pleuropneumoniae serovar 1, 3, 5, or 7. Serum samples collected at the day of inoculation or vaccination and 7, 14, 21, and 28 days later were used to compare the assays. On samples from experimentally infected pigs, the dual-plate CF assay, quad-plate ELISA-1, single-plate ELISA-2, and single-plate ELISA-3 had sensitivities of 0.46, 0.74, 0.13, and 0.13 and specificities of 0.90, 1.0, 1.0, and 1.0, respectively. Vaccinated pigs were identified only by the dual-plate CF assay and the quad-plate ELISA-1. In addition, 90 serum samples with unknown A. pleuropneumoniae exposure collected under field conditions were tested with all assays. The agreement of the 4 assays on field samples was slight to fair. While several assays are available for demonstration of A. pleuropneumoniae exposure, differences in assay targets complicate test choices. Decisions on which assay or combination of assays to use depend on the specific reasons for running the assays.
准确诊断胸膜肺炎放线杆菌感染对于维持阴性猪场至关重要。在本研究中，使用实验感染或接种疫苗的猪的血清样本或来自美国的现场样本，比较了双板补体结合（CF）试验和3种市售酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA；四板ELISA-1、单板ELISA-2和单板ELISA-3）检测胸膜肺炎放线杆菌感染血清学证据的能力。42头猪被分成每组2头猪的小组，分别接种代表胸膜肺炎放线杆菌所有已知血清型的15种胸膜肺炎放线杆菌菌株中的1种、猪放线杆菌，或接种含有胸膜肺炎放线杆菌血清型1、3、5或7的菌苗。在接种或疫苗接种当天以及之后的7、14、21和28天收集的血清样本用于比较这些试验。对于实验感染猪的样本，双板CF试验、四板ELISA-1、单板ELISA-2和单板ELISA-3的敏感性分别为0.46、0.74、0.13和0.13，特异性分别为0.90、1.0、1.0和1.0。仅通过双板CF试验和四板ELISA-1鉴定出接种疫苗的猪。此外，还使用所有试验对90份现场条件下收集的胸膜肺炎放线杆菌感染情况未知的血清样本进行了检测。这4种试验在现场样本上的一致性为轻微到中等。虽然有几种试验可用于证明胸膜肺炎放线杆菌感染，但试验靶点的差异使试验选择变得复杂。关于使用哪种试验或试验组合的决定取决于进行试验的具体原因。
