Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28085106›Full record

ArticleViruses2017

Effective Detection of Porcine Cytomegalovirus Using Non-Invasively Taken Samples from Piglets.

Vladimir A Morozov, Gerd Heinrichs, Joachim Denner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Viruses, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Xenotransplantation - A special case of One Health.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2017
    Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vladimir A MorozovRobert Koch Institute, 13353 Berlin, Germany. MorozovV@rki.de.
Gerd HeinrichsAachen Minipigs, 52525 Heinsberg, Germany. heinrichs.karken@web.de.
Joachim DennerRobert Koch Institute, 13353 Berlin, Germany. DennerJ@rki.de.
Robert Koch Institute · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shortage of human organs forced the development of xenotransplantation using cells, tissues, and organs from pigs. Xenotransplantation may be associated with the transmission of porcine zoonotic microorganisms, among them the porcine cytomegalovirus (PCMV). To prevent virus transmission, pigs have to be screened using sensitive methods. In order to perform regular follow-ups and further breeding of the animals, samples for testing should be collected by low-invasive or non-invasive methods. Sera, ear biopsies, as well as oral and anal swabs were collected from ten 10-day-old Aachen minipigs (AaMP) and tested for PCMV using sensitive nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as well as uniplex and duplex real-time PCR. Porcine cytomegalovirus DNA was detected most frequently in oral and anal swabs. Comparison of duplex and uniplex real-time PCR systems for PCMV detection demonstrated a lower sensitivity of duplex real-time PCR when the copy numbers of the target genes were low (less 200). Therefore, to increase the efficacy of PCMV detection in piglets, early testing of oral and anal swabs by uniplex real-time PCR is recommended.

Indexed as

AnimalsCohort StudiesCytomegalovirusCytomegalovirus InfectionsPolymerase Chain ReactionSpecimen HandlingSwineSwine DiseasesAachen minipigs (AaMP)detectioninfectionnested PCRnon-invasive samplingporcine cytomegalovirus (PCMV)real-time PCRsensitivity

Identifiers

PMID28085106
PMCPMC5294978
OpenAlexW2572619414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.