Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42404371›Full record

ReviewVeterinary medicine international2026

Comprehensive Review of Blood Collection Techniques in Swine: Practical Guidelines for Veterinary Practice.

Giusy Romano, Carla Bresciani, Martina Rega, Federico Righi, Giulia Catellani, Martina Gavezzoli, Claudio Mazzoni

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary medicine international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Giusy RomanoSuivet Sas, Via E. Che Guevara 55, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Carla BrescianiDepartment of Veterinary Science, University of Parma, Strada Del Taglio 10, 43126, Parma, Italy, unipr.it.
Martina RegaDepartment of Veterinary Science, University of Parma, Strada Del Taglio 10, 43126, Parma, Italy, unipr.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8805-6564
Federico RighiDepartment of Veterinary Science, University of Parma, Strada Del Taglio 10, 43126, Parma, Italy, unipr.it.
Giulia CatellaniSuivet Sas, Via E. Che Guevara 55, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Martina GavezzoliDepartment of Veterinary Science, University of Parma, Strada Del Taglio 10, 43126, Parma, Italy, unipr.it.
Claudio MazzoniSuivet Sas, Via E. Che Guevara 55, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Swine veterinary practice involves a range of invasive procedures, including venipuncture and catheterization, for diagnostic, therapeutic, and epidemiological purposes. With the global expansion of pig production and the growing need for effective health monitoring, particularly in the context of infectious disease control programs, such as Aujeszky's disease and swine vesicular disease, the implementation of efficient and welfare-conscious blood collection methods has become a priority. The selection of an appropriate venous access route is particularly critical due to the wide variation in pig size, age, and behavior, as well as the general resistance of adult pigs to human handling, which directly affects operator safety, procedural success, and animal welfare. Commonly employed sites include the jugular and ear veins, while alternative routes-such as the cranial vena cava, orbital venous sinus, tail vessels, cephalic and femoral veins, percutaneous cardiac puncture, subcutaneous abdominal vein, and the mammary vein in lactating sows-may be chosen according to the animal's physiological status and the specific purpose of sampling. Each technique presents distinct advantages and limitations in terms of vein visibility, obtainable blood volume, repeatability, restraint requirements, and potential welfare implications. Forced restraint, required for most methods, can induce substantial stress, alter biological parameters such as serum cortisol, and compromise both sample reliability and animal well-being. While long-term catheterization provides repeated access with minimal handling, its use is typically confined to research settings due to the need for anesthesia, surgical expertise, and individual housing. This review presents a comprehensive anatomical and procedural overview of major blood collection techniques in pigs, critically evaluating their feasibility, invasiveness, and welfare impact. By offering a comparative analysis of each method's suitability across clinical and field scenarios, this work aims to guide swine practitioners in selecting the most appropriate venipuncture or catheterization approach, balancing diagnostic accuracy with ethical responsibility toward animal welfare.

Indexed as

blood samplingpractitionerswineswine anatomy

Identifiers

PMID42404371
PMCPMC13331877

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.