Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39375800›Full record

ArticlePorcine health management2024

Characterizing best practices for tonsil-oral-scrubbing (TOSc) collection for PRRSV RNA detection in sows.

Peng Li, Ana Paula Poeta Silva, Hao Tong, Paul Yeske, Laura Dalquist, Jason Kelly, Matt Finch, Amanda V Anderson Reever, Darwin L Reicks, Joseph F Connor and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Porcine health management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

15 authors.

Peng LiVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Ana Paula Poeta SilvaVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Hao TongVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Paul YeskeSwine Vet Center, Saint Peter, MN, USA.
Laura DalquistSwine Vet Center, Saint Peter, MN, USA.
Jason KellySuidae Health and Production, Algona, IA, USA.
Matt FinchSuidae Health and Production, Algona, IA, USA.
Amanda V Anderson ReeverSuidae Health and Production, Algona, IA, USA.
Darwin L ReicksReicks Veterinary Research & Consulting, Saint Peter, MN, USA.
Joseph F ConnorCarthage Veterinary Service, Ltd, Carthage, IL, USA.
Phillip C GaugerVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Derald J HoltkampVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Gustavo S SilvaVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Giovani TrevisanVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA.
Daniel C L LinharesVeterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ames, IA, USA. linhares@iastate.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA Tonsil-Oral-Scrubbing (TOSc) method was developed to sample the sow's oropharyngeal and tonsillar area without snaring and has shown comparable porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) RNA detection rates with tonsil scraping in infected sows. This study investigated the effect of specific TOSc collection factors on the PRRSV RT-rtPCR results (detection rates and Ct values). Those factors include whether the sow was snared or not snared at TOSc collection ("snared" vs. "not snared"); whether the sow was laying down or standing at collection ("laying down" vs. "standing"); and type of collectors used for TOSc collection ("TOSc prototype" vs. "Spiral-headed AI catheter (SHAC)"). Volume of fluid was compared between "snared" and "not snared" groups, and collection time was compared between "laying down" and "standing" groups as well.

resultsThe effect for each factor was assessed in three independent studies following the same design: TOSc was collected twice from each studied sow, once with the baseline level for a factor ("not snared", or "standing", or "TOSc prototype"), and another time followed by the other level of the paired factor ("snared", "laying down", or "SHAC", correspondingly). Results showed that "not snared" TOSc had numerically higher PRRSV RNA detection rate (60.7% vs. 52.5%, p = 0.11), significantly lower median Ct values (31.9 vs. 32.3, p < 0.01), and significantly higher volume of fluid than "snared" samples (1.8 mL vs. 1.2 mL, p < 0.01); "laying down" TOSc samples did not differ statistically (60.7% vs. 60.7%) in the PRRSV RNA detection rate, obtained numerically lower median Ct values (30.9 vs. 31.3, p = 0.19), but took 40% less collection time compared to "standing" TOSc samples; samples collected using the "TOSc prototype" had numerically higher PRRSV RNA detection rate (91.7% vs. 88.3%, p = 0.27) and significantly lower median Ct values (32.8 vs. 34.5, p < 0.01) than that from "SHAC".

conclusionsUnder the conditions of this study best practices for TOSc collection aiming higher detection rate of PRRSV RNA while minimizing time for collection were suggested to be sampling TOSc without snaring, when sows are laying down, and using a prototype TOSc collector.

Indexed as

Best practiceDetectionPRRSVSowSurveillanceTOSc

Identifiers

PMID39375800
PMCPMC11457483

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.