Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29145875›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2017

Re-visiting the detection of porcine cysticercosis based on full carcass dissections of naturally Taenia solium infected pigs.

Mwelwa Chembensofu, K E Mwape, I Van Damme, E Hobbs, I K Phiri, M Masuku, G Zulu, A Colston, A L Willingham, B Devleesschauwer and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Aggregation ofParasite epidemiology and control · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Mwelwa ChembensofuDepartment of Paraclinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
K E MwapeDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
I Van DammeFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
E HobbsFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
I K PhiriDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
M MasukuDepartment of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
G ZuluDistrict Medical Office, Ministry of Health, P.O. Box 30205, Lusaka, Zambia.
A ColstonGlobal Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines, P.O. Box 52773 - 00100, Valley Arcade, Nairobi, Kenya.
A L WillinghamOne Health Center for Zoonoses and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Ross University School of Veterinary Medicine, P.O. Box 334, Basseterre, St Kitts, Saint Kitts and Nevis.
B DevleesschauwerDepartment of Public Health and Surveillance, Scientific Institute of Public Health (WIV-ISP), Rue Juliette Wytsman 14, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
A Van HulDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Kronenburgstraat 25, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium.
A ChotaDepartment of Paraclinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
N SpeybroeckUniversité catholique de Louvain, Institute of Health and Society (IRSS), School of Public Health, 1200 Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Brussels, Belgium.
D BerkvensDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Kronenburgstraat 25, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium.
P DornyFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium.
S GabriëlFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium. sarah.gabriel@ugent.be.
University of Zambia · ZMGhent University · BEInstituut voor Tropische Geneeskunde · BEInstitut Scientifique de Santé Publique · BEInternational Livestock Research Institute · KEMinistry of Health · ZMRoss University School of Veterinary Medicine · KNUCLouvain · BE

Funding

Belgian cooperation - Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium NAFlemish Ministry of Research- Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp NAGlobal Alliance for Livestock veterinary medicines NARoss University School of Veterinary Medicine NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTaenia solium is a neglected zoonotic parasite. The performances of existing tools for the diagnosis of porcine cysticercosis need further assessment, and their shortcomings call for alternatives. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of tongue palpation and circulating antigen detection for the detection of porcine cysticercosis in naturally infected pigs of slaughter age compared to full carcass dissections (considered the gold standard). Additionally, alternative postmortem dissection procedures were investigated. A total of 68 rural pigs of slaughter age randomly selected in the Eastern Province of Zambia were dissected. Dissections were conducted on full carcasses (or half carcass in case cysticerci were already detected in the first half), including all the organs. Total cysticercus counts, location and stages were recorded and collected cysticerci were identified morphologically and molecularly. All sera were analysed with the B158/B60 antigen detecting ELISA (Ag-ELISA).

resultsKey findings were the high occurrence of T. solium infected pigs (56%) and the presence of T. solium cysticerci in the livers of 26% of infected animals. More than half of the infected carcasses contained viable cysticerci. Seven carcasses had T. hydatigena cysticerci (10%), out of which five carcasses were co-infected with T. hydatigena and T. solium; two carcasses (3%) had only T. hydatigena cysticerci. Compared to full carcass dissection, the specificity of the Ag-ELISA to detect infected carcasses was estimated at 67%, the sensitivity at 68%, increasing to 90% and 100% for the detection of carcasses with one or more viable cysticerci, and more than 10 viable cysts, respectively. Tongue palpation only detected 10% of the cases, half carcass dissection 84%. Selective dissection of the diaphragm, tongue and heart or masseters can be considered, with an estimated sensitivity of 71%, increasing to 86% in carcasses with more than 10 cysticerci.

conclusionsDepending on the aim of the diagnosis, a combination of Ag-ELISA and selective dissection, including investigating the presence of T. hydatigena, can be considered. Full carcass dissection should include the dissection of the liver, kidneys, spleen and lungs, and results should be interpreted carefully, as small cysticerci can easily be overlooked.

Indexed as

AbattoirsAnimalsAntibodies, HelminthAntigens, HelminthCysticercosisDiagnosisDissectionEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayMeatPalpationSensitivity and SpecificitySwineSwine DiseasesTaenia soliumTongueZambiaAntibodies, HelminthAntigens, HelminthAntigen ELISACysticercosisDissectionLiverPig carcassTaenia soliumTongue palpation

Identifiers

PMID29145875
PMCPMC5693468
OpenAlexW2768699557

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.