Li Peng, Silva Ana Paula Poeta, Tong Hao, Yeske Paul, Dalquist Laura, Kelly Jason, Finch Matt, Reever Amanda V Anderson, Reicks Darwin L, Connor Joseph F, Gauger Phillip C, Holtkamp Derald J, Silva Gustavo S, Trevisan Giovani, Linhares Daniel C L
Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Swine Vet Center, Saint Peter, MN, USA.
Porcine Health Manag. 2024 Oct 7;10(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s40813-024-00385-7.
A Tonsil-Oral-Scrubbing (TOSc) method was developed to sample the sow's oropharyngeal and tonsillar area without snaring and has shown comparable porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) RNA detection rates with tonsil scraping in infected sows. This study investigated the effect of specific TOSc collection factors on the PRRSV RT-rtPCR results (detection rates and Ct values). Those factors include whether the sow was snared or not snared at TOSc collection ("snared" vs. "not snared"); whether the sow was laying down or standing at collection ("laying down" vs. "standing"); and type of collectors used for TOSc collection ("TOSc prototype" vs. "Spiral-headed AI catheter (SHAC)"). Volume of fluid was compared between "snared" and "not snared" groups, and collection time was compared between "laying down" and "standing" groups as well.
The effect for each factor was assessed in three independent studies following the same design: TOSc was collected twice from each studied sow, once with the baseline level for a factor ("not snared", or "standing", or "TOSc prototype"), and another time followed by the other level of the paired factor ("snared", "laying down", or "SHAC", correspondingly). Results showed that "not snared" TOSc had numerically higher PRRSV RNA detection rate (60.7% vs. 52.5%, p = 0.11), significantly lower median Ct values (31.9 vs. 32.3, p < 0.01), and significantly higher volume of fluid than "snared" samples (1.8 mL vs. 1.2 mL, p < 0.01); "laying down" TOSc samples did not differ statistically (60.7% vs. 60.7%) in the PRRSV RNA detection rate, obtained numerically lower median Ct values (30.9 vs. 31.3, p = 0.19), but took 40% less collection time compared to "standing" TOSc samples; samples collected using the "TOSc prototype" had numerically higher PRRSV RNA detection rate (91.7% vs. 88.3%, p = 0.27) and significantly lower median Ct values (32.8 vs. 34.5, p < 0.01) than that from "SHAC".
Under the conditions of this study best practices for TOSc collection aiming higher detection rate of PRRSV RNA while minimizing time for collection were suggested to be sampling TOSc without snaring, when sows are laying down, and using a prototype TOSc collector.
一种扁桃体-口腔擦拭(TOSc)方法被开发出来,用于在不套住母猪的情况下对其口咽和扁桃体区域进行采样,并且在感染母猪中,该方法显示出与扁桃体刮擦法相当的猪繁殖与呼吸综合征病毒(PRRSV)RNA检测率。本研究调查了特定的TOSc采集因素对PRRSV RT-rtPCR结果(检测率和Ct值)的影响。这些因素包括在TOSc采集时母猪是否被套住(“被套住”与“未被套住”);采集时母猪是躺着还是站着(“躺着”与“站着”);以及用于TOSc采集的采集器类型(“TOSc原型”与“螺旋头人工授精导管(SHAC)”)。比较了“被套住”和“未被套住”组之间的液体量,以及“躺着”和“站着”组之间的采集时间。
按照相同设计在三项独立研究中评估了每个因素的影响:对每头研究母猪进行两次TOSc采集,一次采用某个因素的基线水平(“未被套住”,或“站着”,或“TOSc原型”),另一次采用配对因素的另一个水平(相应地为“被套住”、“躺着”或“SHAC”)。结果显示,“未被套住”的TOSc在数值上具有更高的PRRSV RNA检测率(60.7%对52.5%,p = 0.11),中位数Ct值显著更低(31.9对32.3,p < 0.01),并且液体量显著高于“被套住”的样本(1.8 mL对1.2 mL,p < 0.01);“躺着”的TOSc样本在PRRSV RNA检测率上无统计学差异(60.7%对60.7%),在数值上获得的中位数Ct值更低(30.9对31.3,p = 0.19),但与“站着”的TOSc样本相比,采集时间少40%;使用“TOSc原型”采集的样本在数值上具有更高的PRRSV RNA检测率(91.7%对88.3%,p = 0.27),并且中位数Ct值显著低于“SHAC”采集的样本(32.8对34.5,p < 0.01)。
在本研究条件下,为提高PRRSV RNA检测率并尽量减少采集时间,建议TOSc采集的最佳做法是在母猪躺着时不套住进行采样,并使用TOSc原型采集器。