ArticleJournal of virological methods2014
Effect of handling and storage conditions and stabilizing agent on the recovery of viral RNA from oral fluid of pigs.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Strategies for Preserving Swine Viral RNA Targets in Diagnostic Specimens.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Effect of extrinsic factors on the detection of PRRSV and a porcine-specific internal sample control in serum, oral fluid, and fecal specimens tested by RT-rtPCR.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Non-Invasive Sampling Methods for Detection of Hepatitis E Virus Infected Pigs in Pens.Microorganisms · 2023Article
- Article
- Stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Nonsupplemented Saliva.Emerging infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Simply saliva: stability of SARS-CoV-2 detection negates the need for expensive collection devices.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2020Article
- Molecular detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, porcine circovirus 2 and hepatitis E virus in oral fluid compared to their detection in faeces and serum.BMC veterinary research · 2020Article
- Guidelines for oral fluid-based surveillance of viral pathogens in swine.Porcine health management · 2020Review
- Hepatitis E virus: reasons for emergence in humans.Current opinion in virology · 2019Review
- Survey of porcine respiratory disease complex-associated pathogens among commercial pig farms in Korea via oral fluid method.Journal of veterinary science · 2017Article
- Public health risks associated with hepatitis E virus (HEV) as a food-borne pathogen.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2017Article
- The use of oral fluids to monitor key pathogens in porcine respiratory disease complex.Porcine health management · 2017Article
- Survival and Elimination of Hepatitis E Virus: A Review.Food and environmental virology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is an increasing interest in using oral fluid to determine herd health and documenting the circulation of viruses in commercial swine populations but little is known about the stability of viruses in oral fluid. Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a zoonotic virus which is widespread in swine herds. Information on optimal handling methods such as heat treatments, freezing and RNA stabilization agents is needed to prevent or minimize degradation of viral RNA by degradative enzymes. The objectives of the study were to determine optimum handling conditions of the oral fluid before RNA extraction and to compare the performance of the RNeasy Protect Saliva Mini kit, which contains a stabilizing agent, with that of the QIAamp Viral RNA Mini kit, which does not contain a stabilizing agent. Preliminary studies with oral fluid inoculated with HEV indicated that a heat treatment of 60°C for 15min was detrimental to HEV RNA. HEV was recovered from 25/25 and 24/25 samples of oral fluid when samples were incubated for ≤24h at 4°C and 30days at -20°C, respectively, without a stabilizing agent and extracted with the QiaAMP kit. In contrast, HEV RNA was detected in 16/25 and 11/25 samples when samples were incubated with a stabilizing agent for 24h at 37°C and 30days at -20°C, respectively, and extracted with the RNeasy Protect Saliva kit. Moreover, the mean number of genome copies/ml of HEV recovered from oral fluid stored at -20°C without the stabilizing agent was 2.9 log units higher than oral fluid stored at -20°C in the presence of the stabilizing agent. The recovery of RNA from HEV, F-RNA coliphage MS2 and murine norovirus (MNV), which are surrogates for norovirus, was significantly greater when oral fluid was incubated for 24h at 4°C than when oral fluid was stabilized with RNAprotect Saliva Reagent for 24h at 37°C, where the relative differences between the two processes were 1.4, 1.8, and 2.7 log genome copies/ml for MS2, MNV, and HEV, respectively. The findings suggest that it is unnecessary to stabilize oral fluid from swine for the detection of viral RNA, provided the samples are stored at 4°C or frozen at -20°C, and that the RNeasy Protect Saliva Mini kit did not perform well for the detection of viral RNA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.