Berggren S A
Nord Vet Med. 1978 Sep;30(9):364-70.
In a trial involving 371 head of cattle, the results of using avian plus bovine tuberculin and avian plus mammaliam tuberculin were compared. One group of 185 cattle from areas of low tuberculosis incidence and another group of 186 cattle from areas of high incidence were tuberculin tested and examined for pathological lesions. Using the interpretation "non-specific infection not established" with avian plus mammaliam tuberculin on the readings from cattle from high incidence areas, the test detected 83% of the cattle with visible lesions, whereas the avian plus bovine tuberculin test only detected 63%. The avian plus mammaliam tuberculin test is therefore more accurate; however, it appears to be too sensitive as it produces a higher rate of inconclusive results from non-infected cattle, and is thus more difficult to interpret. Many cattle giving positive reactions were found to be free of tubercular lesions when examined post mortem; the possibility is discussed of their allergy to the test being caused by mycobacteria other than tuberculosis, as mycobacteria belonging to Runyons Group IV have been isolated from some of these cases.
在一项涉及371头牛的试验中，对使用禽型加牛型结核菌素和禽型加兽型结核菌素的结果进行了比较。一组185头牛来自结核病发病率低的地区，另一组186头牛来自发病率高的地区，对这些牛进行了结核菌素检测并检查了病理病变。对于来自高发病率地区的牛的检测结果，采用“未确定非特异性感染”的解读方式，禽型加兽型结核菌素检测出83%有可见病变的牛，而禽型加牛型结核菌素检测仅检测出63%。因此，禽型加兽型结核菌素检测更准确；然而，它似乎过于敏感，因为未感染牛产生不确定结果的比例更高，因此更难解读。许多呈阳性反应的牛在死后检查时被发现没有结核病变；讨论了它们对检测过敏可能是由非结核分枝杆菌引起的可能性，因为在其中一些病例中已分离出属于鲁尼恩斯第四组的分枝杆菌。
