ArticleParasites & vectors2014
Indirect versus direct detection methods of Trichinella spp. infection in wild boar (Sus scrofa).
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Immunoproteomic Analysis ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Serological testing forFood and waterborne parasitology · 2022Article
- Investigation of the Food-Transmitted ParasitesAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Differences in larval survival and IgG response patterns in long-lasting infections by Trichinella spiralis, Trichinella britovi and Trichinella pseudospiralis in pigs.Parasites & vectors · 2020Article
- International Commission on Trichinellosis: Recommendations on the use of serological tests for the detection ofFood and waterborne parasitology · 2019Review
- Differentiation of Trichinella species (Trichinella spiralis/Trichinella britovi versus Trichinella pseudospiralis) using western blot.Parasites & vectors · 2018Article
- Multilocus genotype analysis outlines distinct histories for Trichinella britovi in the neighboring Mediterranean islands of Corsica and Sardinia.Parasites & vectors · 2018Article
- A preliminary survey of Trichinella spp. in pigs raised under controlled housing conditions in Colombia: 2014-2016.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2018Article
- Hunting dogs as sentinel animals for monitoring infections with Trichinella spp. in wildlife.Parasites & vectors · 2016Article
- First Report of the Occurrence of Trichinella-Specific Antibodies in Domestic Pigs in Central and Eastern Uganda.PloS one · 2016Article
- A 38-year study on Trichinella spp. in wild boar (Sus scrofa) of Latvia shows a stable incidence with an increased parasite biomass in the last decade.Parasites & vectors · 2015Article
- Epidemiological Studies on Porcine Trichinellosis in Five States of North East India.Iranian journal of parasitologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrichinella spp. infections in wild boar (Sus scrofa), one of the main sources of human trichinellosis, continue to represent a public health problem. The detection of Trichinella spp. larvae in muscles of wild boar by digestion can prevent the occurrence of clinical trichinellosis in humans. However, the analytical sensitivity of digestion in the detection process is dependent on the quantity of tested muscle. Consequently, large quantities of muscle have to be digested to warrant surveillance programs, or more sensitive tests need to be employed. The use of indirect detection methods, such as the ELISA to detect Trichinella spp. infections in wild boar has limitations due to its low specificity. The aim of the study was to implement serological detection of anti-Trichinella spp. antibodies in meat juices from hunted wild boar for the surveillance of Trichinella spp. infections.
methodsTwo tests were used, ELISA for the initial screening test, and a specific and sensitive Western blot (Wb) as a confirmatory test. The circulation of anti-Trichinella IgG was determined in hunted wild boar muscle juice samples in 9 provinces of 5 Italian regions.
resultsFrom 1,462 muscle fluid samples, 315 (21.5%, 95% C.I. 19.51-23.73) were tested positive by ELISA. The 315 ELISA-positive muscle fluid samples were further tested by Wb and 32 (10.1%, 95% C.I. 7.29-13.99) of these were positive with a final seroprevalence of 2.2% (95% C.I 1.55-3.07; 32/1,462). Trichinella britovi larvae were detected by artificial digestion in muscle tissues of one (0.07%, 95%C.I. 0.01-0.39) out of the 1,462 hunted wild boars. No Trichinella spp. larvae were detected in Wb-negative wild boar. From 2006 to 2012, a prevalence of 0.017% was detected by muscle digestion in wild boar hunted in the whole Italian territory.
conclusionsThe combined use of both serological methods had a sensitivity 31.4 times higher than that of the digestion (32/1,462 versus 1/1,462), suggesting their potential use for the surveillance of the Trichinella spp. infection in wild boar populations.
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.