Good Margaret, Bakker Douwe, Duignan Anthony, Collins Daniel M
Independent Researcher and Private Consultant, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin (previously affiliated with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Dublin), Ireland.
Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Front Vet Sci. 2018 Apr 9;5:59. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00059. eCollection 2018.
Tuberculosis (TB) is more than 3 million years old thriving in multiple species. Ancestral gave rise to multiple strains including now distributed worldwide with zoonotic transmission happening in both directions between animals and humans. in milk caused problems with a significant number of deaths in children under 5 years of age due largely to extrapulmonary TB. This risk was effectively mitigated with widespread milk pasteurization during the twentieth century, and fewer young children were lost to TB. Koch developed tuberculin in 1890 and recognizing the possibility of using tuberculin to detect infected animals the first tests were quickly developed. Bovine TB (bTB) control/eradication programmes followed in the late nineteenth century/early twentieth century. Many scientists collaborated and contributed to the development of tuberculin tests, to refining and optimizing the production and standardization of tuberculin and to determining test sensitivity and specificity using various methodologies and injection sites. The WHO, OIE, and EU have set legal standards for tuberculin production, potency assay performance, and intradermal tests for bovines. Now, those using tuberculin tests for bTB control/eradication programmes rarely, see TB as a disease. Notwithstanding the launch of the first-ever roadmap to combat zoonotic TB, many wonder if bTB is actually a problem? Is there a better way of dealing with bTB? Might alternative skin test sites make the test "better" and easier to perform? Are all tuberculins used for testing equally good? Why have alternative "better" tests not been developed? This review was prompted by these types of questions. This article attempts to succinctly summarize the data in the literature from the late nineteenth century to date to show why TB, and zoonotic TB specifically, was and still is important as a "One Health" concern, and that the necessity to reduce the burden of zoonotic TB, to save lives and secure livelihoods is far too important to await the possible future development of novel diagnostic assays for livestock before renewing efforts to eliminate it. Consequently, it is highly probable that the tuberculin skin test will remain the screening test of choice for farmed livestock for the considerable future.
结核病(TB)已有三百多万年历史,在多种物种中传播。其原始菌株衍生出多个毒株,包括目前在全球范围内分布的毒株,动物与人之间存在双向人畜共患病传播。牛奶中的结核菌曾导致大量5岁以下儿童死亡,主要原因是肺外结核。20世纪广泛推行牛奶巴氏杀菌法后,这一风险得到有效缓解,死于结核病的幼儿减少。1890年科赫发明了结核菌素,认识到可用结核菌素检测感染动物后,很快就开展了首批检测。19世纪末20世纪初相继实施了牛结核病(bTB)控制/根除计划。许多科学家合作,推动了结核菌素检测的发展,改进并优化了结核菌素的生产与标准化,还运用各种方法和注射部位确定检测的敏感性和特异性。世界卫生组织、世界动物卫生组织和欧盟为结核菌素生产、效价测定以及牛的皮内检测制定了法律标准。如今,在bTB控制/根除计划中使用结核菌素检测的人很少将结核病视为一种疾病。尽管发布了首份抗击人畜共患结核病路线图,但许多人仍怀疑bTB是否真的是个问题?是否有更好的方法应对bTB?其他皮肤检测部位能否使检测“更好”且更易于操作?用于检测的所有结核菌素都同样有效吗?为何尚未开发出其他“更好”的检测方法?本文就是受这类问题启发而撰写。本文试图简要总结19世纪末至今文献中的数据,以说明为何结核病,尤其是人畜共患结核病,过去是且现在仍然是“同一健康”关注重点中的重要问题,以及减轻人畜共患结核病负担、拯救生命和保障生计的必要性极其重要,不能坐等未来可能出现的新型家畜诊断检测方法,而应立即重新努力消除该病。因此,在可预见的未来,结核菌素皮肤检测很可能仍将是养殖家畜首选的筛查检测方法。