Comparison of Nose Wipes, Stall Sponges, and Air Samples with Nasal Secretions for the Molecular Detection of Equine Influenza Virus in Clinically and Subclinically Infected Horses.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 VIROLOGY
Viruses-Basel Pub Date : 2025-03-20 DOI:10.3390/v17030449
Nicola Pusterla, Kaila Lawton, Samantha Barnum, K Gary Magdesian
{"title":"Comparison of Nose Wipes, Stall Sponges, and Air Samples with Nasal Secretions for the Molecular Detection of Equine Influenza Virus in Clinically and Subclinically Infected Horses.","authors":"Nicola Pusterla, Kaila Lawton, Samantha Barnum, K Gary Magdesian","doi":"10.3390/v17030449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, the use of non-invasive host and environmental samples for the detection and monitoring of equine respiratory pathogens has shown promise and a high overall agreement with the gold standard of nasal secretions. The present study looked at comparing nose wipes, stall sponges, and air samples with nasal swabs collected from 27 horses involved in an equine influenza (EI) outbreak. The outbreak involved 5 clinical, 6 subclinical, and 16 uninfected horses. Samples sets were collected at the onset of the index case and retested every 2-3 days thereafter until all horses tested qPCR-negative for EI virus (EIV). Nose wipes and stall sponges identified EIV in all clinical cases, and air samples identified EIV in 4/5 clinical horses. The overall agreement with all nasal swabs collected from clinical cases was 89% for nose wipes, 78% for stall sponges, and 44% for air samples. Due to the shorter shedding time in subclinical cases, nose wipes and stall sponges detected EIV in 5/6 and 4/6 subclinical horses, respectively. Only one single air sample tested qPCR-positive for EIV in a subclinical shedder. When compared to the gold standard of nasal secretions in subclinically infected horses, the overall agreement was 54% for stall sponges, 50% for air samples, and 45% for nose wipes. The collection of non-invasive contact and environmental samples is a promising alternative to nasal swabs for the detection of EIV in clinically and subclinically infected horses. However, they should always be considered as a second-choice sample type to the more accurate nasal swabs and used to test refractory horses or large populations during outbreaks. Further, the pooling of identical or different samples collected from the same horse for the qPCR testing of EIV increases the accuracy of detecting EIV, especially in subclinically infected horses.</p>","PeriodicalId":49328,"journal":{"name":"Viruses-Basel","volume":"17 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11946545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Viruses-Basel","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/v17030449","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, the use of non-invasive host and environmental samples for the detection and monitoring of equine respiratory pathogens has shown promise and a high overall agreement with the gold standard of nasal secretions. The present study looked at comparing nose wipes, stall sponges, and air samples with nasal swabs collected from 27 horses involved in an equine influenza (EI) outbreak. The outbreak involved 5 clinical, 6 subclinical, and 16 uninfected horses. Samples sets were collected at the onset of the index case and retested every 2-3 days thereafter until all horses tested qPCR-negative for EI virus (EIV). Nose wipes and stall sponges identified EIV in all clinical cases, and air samples identified EIV in 4/5 clinical horses. The overall agreement with all nasal swabs collected from clinical cases was 89% for nose wipes, 78% for stall sponges, and 44% for air samples. Due to the shorter shedding time in subclinical cases, nose wipes and stall sponges detected EIV in 5/6 and 4/6 subclinical horses, respectively. Only one single air sample tested qPCR-positive for EIV in a subclinical shedder. When compared to the gold standard of nasal secretions in subclinically infected horses, the overall agreement was 54% for stall sponges, 50% for air samples, and 45% for nose wipes. The collection of non-invasive contact and environmental samples is a promising alternative to nasal swabs for the detection of EIV in clinically and subclinically infected horses. However, they should always be considered as a second-choice sample type to the more accurate nasal swabs and used to test refractory horses or large populations during outbreaks. Further, the pooling of identical or different samples collected from the same horse for the qPCR testing of EIV increases the accuracy of detecting EIV, especially in subclinically infected horses.

临床和亚临床感染马流感病毒分子检测中鼻巾、马厩海绵和带有鼻分泌物的空气样本的比较
近年来,使用非侵入性宿主和环境样本检测和监测马呼吸道病原体已显示出前景,并且与鼻分泌物金标准总体上高度一致。本研究将鼻巾、马厩海绵和空气样本与从27匹马流感(EI)暴发中收集的鼻拭子进行比较。暴发涉及5匹临床、6匹亚临床和16匹未感染的马。在指示病例发病时收集了几组样本,此后每2-3天重新检测一次,直到所有马的EI病毒(EIV) qpcr检测呈阴性。鼻巾和马厩海绵在所有临床病例中发现了EIV,空气样本在4/5匹临床马中发现了EIV。从临床病例收集的所有鼻拭子与鼻湿巾的总体一致性为89%,与隔间海绵的一致性为78%,与空气样本的一致性为44%。由于亚临床病例的脱落时间较短,鼻巾和马厩海绵分别在5/6和4/6的亚临床马中检测到EIV。在一名亚临床脱毛患者中,只有一份空气样本qpcr检测为EIV阳性。与亚临床感染马的鼻分泌物的金标准相比,马厩海绵的总体一致性为54%,空气样本的一致性为50%,鼻湿巾的一致性为45%。在临床和亚临床感染的马中,收集非侵入性接触和环境样本是一种有希望的替代鼻拭子检测EIV的方法。然而,它们应始终被视为较准确的鼻拭子之外的第二选择样本类型,并在疫情期间用于检测难治马或大种群。此外,汇集从同一匹马收集的相同或不同样本进行EIV的qPCR检测可以提高EIV检测的准确性,特别是在亚临床感染的马中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Viruses-Basel
Viruses-Basel VIROLOGY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
12.80%
发文量
2445
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Viruses (ISSN 1999-4915) is an open access journal which provides an advanced forum for studies of viruses. It publishes reviews, regular research papers, communications, conference reports and short notes. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. We also encourage the publication of timely reviews and commentaries on topics of interest to the virology community and feature highlights from the virology literature in the ''News and Views'' section. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信