Literature DB >> 29406076

An epidemiological investigation of the early phase of the porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) outbreak in Canadian swine herds in 2014: A case-control study.

Amanda M Perri1, Zvonimir Poljak2, Cate Dewey3, John C S Harding4, Terri L O'Sullivan5.   

Abstract

The first case of porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) in Canada was diagnosed in January 2014 in Ontario, approximately 9 months after PED emerged in the United States. An early investigation of the Canadian outbreak suspected that the probable source of the virus was contaminated feed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of feed and other possible factors in the early phase of the PED outbreak in Canadian swine herds. The study period of interest for this case-control study was January 22nd to March 1st, 2014. A case herd was defined as a swine herd with a confirmed positive laboratory diagnostic test (RT-PCR) results for PED virus, along with pigs exhibiting typical clinical signs at the herd level during the study period. A questionnaire was administered to participating producers from the 22 Canadian swine herds enrolled (n = 9 case and n = 13 control herds). Case herd producers were asked to provide information from the initial day of onset of clinical signs and 30 days prior to that day. Control herds were matched to a case herd on the basis of province, herd type and approximate size. The period of interest for a control herd was matched to the initial day of clinical signs of PED for the case herd, along with the 30 days prior to this day. The questionnaire questions focused on herd demographics, biosecurity protocols, live animal movements onto and off sites, deadstock movements, feed and people movements for both the case and control herds. The questionnaire for control herds were based on their matched case's period of interest, and together with case herds formed a matched stratum. Multivariable exact conditional logistic regression and mixed multivariable logistic regression models, with the matched stratum as a random effect, were used to assess the association between various risk factors and the odds of PED introduction into a herd. After adjusting for biosecurity practices, the odds of a PED occurrence was 38.1 (95% CI: 2.7-531.3) times greater for herds receiving feed from a single feed company that provided potentially contaminated feed (P = 0.007) than herds that did not. The number of live pigs delivered onto sites, semen deliveries and the frequency of deadstock pickups were not associated with PED status during the initial phase of the outbreak in univariable analyses. This study supports the role of potentially contaminated feed from a single feed company as a significant risk factor for PED viral introduction during the early phase of the Canadian outbreak.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Animal movement; Biosecurity; Case-control; Feed; Porcine epidemic diarrhea; Swine

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29406076     DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.12.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Vet Med        ISSN: 0167-5877            Impact factor:   2.670


  9 in total

1.  Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus Infection Disrupts the Nasal Endothelial Barrier To Favor Viral Dissemination.

Authors:  Jianda Li; Yuchen Li; Peng Liu; Xiuyu Wang; Yichao Ma; Qiu Zhong; Qian Yang
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 6.549

Review 2.  The Canadian 2014 porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus outbreak: Important risk factors that were not considered in the epidemiological investigation could change the conclusions.

Authors:  Louis E Russell; Javier Polo; David Meeker
Journal:  Transbound Emerg Dis       Date:  2020-02-16       Impact factor: 5.005

Review 3.  Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV): An update on etiology, transmission, pathogenesis, and prevention and control.

Authors:  Kwonil Jung; Linda J Saif; Qiuhong Wang
Journal:  Virus Res       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 3.303

Review 4.  The risk of viral transmission in feed: What do we know, what do we do?

Authors:  Scott A Dee; Megan C Niederwerder; Gil Patterson; Roger Cochrane; Cassie Jones; Diego Diel; Egan Brockhoff; Eric Nelson; Gordon Spronk; Paul Sundberg
Journal:  Transbound Emerg Dis       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 5.005

5.  Thermal inactivation of African swine fever virus in feed ingredients.

Authors:  Tapanut Songkasupa; Prakit Boonpornprasert; Nutthakarn Suwankitwat; Walaiporn Lohlamoh; Chackrit Nuengjamnong; Suphachai Nuanualsuwan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 6.  Caprine Arthritis Encephalitis Virus Disease Modelling Review.

Authors:  Karina Brotto Rebuli; Mario Giacobini; Luigi Bertolotti
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 7.  The Role of Non-animal Origin Feed Ingredients in Transmission of Viral Pathogens of Swine: A Review of Scientific Literature.

Authors:  Rebecca K Gordon; Ingrid K Kotowski; Kari F Coulson; Donald Link; Alexandra MacKenzie; Joyce Bowling-Heyward
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2019-08-22

8.  A descriptive study of on-farm biosecurity and management practices during the incursion of porcine epidemic diarrhea into Canadian swine herds, 2014.

Authors:  Amanda M Perri; Zvonimir Poljak; Cate Dewey; John Cs Harding; Terri L O'Sullivan
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.672

Review 9.  Risk and Mitigation of African Swine Fever Virus in Feed.

Authors:  Megan C Niederwerder
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 2.752

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.