{"title":"Efficacy of Brucella Vaccines in Sheep: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Lian-Min Li, Wen-Tao Xiang, Ting Li, Mei-Mei Xiang, Fei Liu, Jian-Ming Li","doi":"10.1155/2024/5524768","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Background</i>. Brucellosis is a major worldwide public health problem with economic and zoonotic implications. Despite the importance of vaccines in preventing brucellosis, no previous systematic evaluation of vaccination in sheep has been conducted. <i>Materials and Methods</i>. Articles were searched in databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, VIP, Wan Fang, and CNKI by screening the articles, and articles reporting <i>Brucella</i> vaccination in sheep were included in the study. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models to calculate pooled risk ratios for vaccines and to calculate vaccine effectiveness. <i>Results</i>. A total of 2,605 articles were retrieved, and 17 articles were obtained through screening for analysis. The effectiveness of vaccination was 65% (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.27–0.36; VE = 65%), with the M5 vaccine being significantly more effective at 84% (RR = 0.1587, 95% CI: 0.0256–0.9858; VE = 84%) than the other vaccines, and intramuscular injection could be the best route of immunization. Rev.1 was indicated for female sheep, especially for pregnant ewes (RR = 0.2016, 95% CI: 0.1139–0.3569; VE = 80%), and for reduced abortions (RR = 0.0978, 95% CI: 0.0459–0.2085). <i>Conclusion</i>. This meta-analysis was conducted to identify the relevant factors affecting vaccine efficacy. We recommend that sheep be inoculated intramuscularly with Rev.1, different inoculation protocols be adopted for sheep of different ages, and pregnant ewes be inoculated with Rev.1 to prevent abortion.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":234,"journal":{"name":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/5524768","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/5524768","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background. Brucellosis is a major worldwide public health problem with economic and zoonotic implications. Despite the importance of vaccines in preventing brucellosis, no previous systematic evaluation of vaccination in sheep has been conducted. Materials and Methods. Articles were searched in databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, VIP, Wan Fang, and CNKI by screening the articles, and articles reporting Brucella vaccination in sheep were included in the study. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models to calculate pooled risk ratios for vaccines and to calculate vaccine effectiveness. Results. A total of 2,605 articles were retrieved, and 17 articles were obtained through screening for analysis. The effectiveness of vaccination was 65% (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.27–0.36; VE = 65%), with the M5 vaccine being significantly more effective at 84% (RR = 0.1587, 95% CI: 0.0256–0.9858; VE = 84%) than the other vaccines, and intramuscular injection could be the best route of immunization. Rev.1 was indicated for female sheep, especially for pregnant ewes (RR = 0.2016, 95% CI: 0.1139–0.3569; VE = 80%), and for reduced abortions (RR = 0.0978, 95% CI: 0.0459–0.2085). Conclusion. This meta-analysis was conducted to identify the relevant factors affecting vaccine efficacy. We recommend that sheep be inoculated intramuscularly with Rev.1, different inoculation protocols be adopted for sheep of different ages, and pregnant ewes be inoculated with Rev.1 to prevent abortion.
期刊介绍：
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases brings together in one place the latest research on infectious diseases considered to hold the greatest economic threat to animals and humans worldwide. The journal provides a venue for global research on their diagnosis, prevention and management, and for papers on public health, pathogenesis, epidemiology, statistical modeling, diagnostics, biosecurity issues, genomics, vaccine development and rapid communication of new outbreaks. Papers should include timely research approaches using state-of-the-art technologies. The editors encourage papers adopting a science-based approach on socio-economic and environmental factors influencing the management of the bio-security threat posed by these diseases, including risk analysis and disease spread modeling. Preference will be given to communications focusing on novel science-based approaches to controlling transboundary and emerging diseases. The following topics are generally considered out-of-scope, but decisions are made on a case-by-case basis (for example, studies on cryptic wildlife populations, and those on potential species extinctions):
Pathogen discovery: a common pathogen newly recognised in a specific country, or a new pathogen or genetic sequence for which there is little context about — or insights regarding — its emergence or spread.
Prevalence estimation surveys and risk factor studies based on survey (rather than longitudinal) methodology, except when such studies are unique. Surveys of knowledge, attitudes and practices are within scope.
Diagnostic test development if not accompanied by robust sensitivity and specificity estimation from field studies.
Studies focused only on laboratory methods in which relevance to disease emergence and spread is not obvious or can not be inferred (“pure research” type studies).
Narrative literature reviews which do not generate new knowledge. Systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses are within scope.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
