Postmortem sampling. Tonsil biopsies were confirmed histologically to
contain tonsillar tissues in all 42 animals, and
all were negative for PRRSV by both PCR and VI. A lateral retropharyngeal LN
from one sow was PRRSV-positive by IHC, but not by PCR. The initial VI results
were confirmed by a second isolation from the lateral retropharyngeal LN. This
animal had an ELISA s:p ratio of 1:20 at necropsy. All other tissues collected from the
remaining sows were PRRSV-negative by all described methods.
Experimental animal study
Antemortem sampling. On day 3 after experimental infection, PRRSV was
detected in the sera of sows A and B by PCR and VI, and on day 10, ELISA was
positive for PRRSV antibody. Sow C remained negative for PRRSV by ELISA, PCR,
and VI throughout the 14-day period. Tonsil biopsies were obtained from all three
sows prior to necropsy. Histopathological evaluation confirmed the presence of
tonsillar tissue in the biopsies collected from sows
A and C, but not sow B. The PRRS virus was detected by PCR in the tonsil sample
collected from sow A. The PRRS virus was not isolated from any antemortem
samples collected after viremia had ceased.
Postmortem sampling. The PRRS virus was detected by PCR in the following
tissues collected from sow A: mandibular LN, lateral retropharyngeal LN, medial
iliac LN, superficial inguinal LN, ovarian LN, tonsil, heart, uterus, kidney, and
umbilical cord, and PRRSV was isolated from all of these tissues except kidney and
umbilical cord. The PRRS virus was detected by PCR from the following tissues
collected from sow B: uterus, mandibular LN, sternal LN, lateral retropharyngeal LN,
and superficial inguinal lymph nodes. All tissues from sow B were negative for
PRRSV by VI. All tissue and serum samples from sow C were negative for PRRSV by
ELISA, PCR, and VI.
Discussion
Tonsil tissue was obtained by antemortem biopsy from only 21 of the 42
purchased sows, and from two of the three experimentally infected sows. In contrast,
tonsil tissue was obtained by postmortem biopsy from 100% of the animals. Therefore,
it appears that histopathological verification is critical to ensure that tonsil biopsy
submitted for detection of PRRSV is truly tonsil. It is unknown whether
practitioners using tonsil biopsy are confirming
their results in this manner, and it is strongly recommended that they do.
In contrast to previous reports,2-4
PRRSV was not detected in any of the tonsil samples collected. One explanation for
this observation could be that our study focused entirely on sows, while
previously published work was based on
experimental infection of nursery age pigs. The
duration of PRRSV viremia in the nursery pig has been reported to range from 3-35 days,
in contrast to 9-11 days in adult
animals.16,17 While PRRSV was not detected in
tonsils of any of the 42 animals in the field
study, it was detected in one sow in a lymphoid region not accessible in the live
animal. Therefore, tonsil biopsy may generate
false negative results. Finally, only one of the two experimentally infected animals
had detectable PRRSV in the tonsil, although the virus was detected in other
sites throughout the body in both sows.
In our experience, the protocol for tonsil biopsy was technically challenging
and would be difficult to apply to large breeding herd populations. Three people
were required to obtain each sample: one to restrain the sow, a second to collect
the sample, and another to illuminate the tonsil using a flashlight. Furthermore,
collection of the sample resulted in extensive trauma to the oropharyngeal region of
the sow, and the entire process frequently took 2-3 minutes to compete. In contrast,
two people can collect a blood sample in 30-60 seconds.
Animals from only one farm were used in this experiment, a significant limitation
of the study. Whether these results are representative of those from other infected
farms remains to be seen. One could speculate that in an acute outbreak, the recovery
of PRRSV-infected tonsils might be much higher. The major difference in the
results obtained by Kolb12 and the results
from our study may relate to the difference in the stage of the disease in the animals.
In the Kolb study, acutely infected finishing pigs were sampled, and PRRSV was
detected in 0-60% of the animals sampled by PCR and VI. However, since the
tissues were not examined microscopically, it is unknown whether PRRSV was
undetected in some samples because there was no
virus in the tissues, or because inappropriate samples had been collected. The
veterinarian responsible for sample collection in
our study had no prior experience with the biopsy procedure, and different results
might have been obtained if experienced personnel had been employed. Finally, the
percentage of PRRSV-infected tonsil samples might have been higher if more
sensitive assays (i.e. nested PCR or swine
bioassay) had been used.18 However, use of
nested PCR assays may result in false positive readings because of laboratory
contamination (dust, non-specific nucleic acid,
etc),19 and the availability and cost of animals
and facilities may limit the practicality of swine bioassay. We selected tests for this study
on the basis of their availability to swine practitioners through US diagnostic
laboratories, and did not consider research
facilities as centers for routine testing.
This is the first report of the use of tonsil biopsy to detect PRRSV in adult
breeding swine. This study differs from published reports in a number of respects: sows
were studied instead of nursery age pigs, the field study allowed for the evaluation
of naturally infected sows, and the experimental animal study used a relatively low
total dose of PRRSV (10 2.4
TCID50).
Implications
On the basis of our results, we conclude that:
- Antemortem tonsil biopsy is inaccurate for collection of tonsil
in unanesthetized sows when conducted by inexperienced veterinarians.
- Tonsil may not be a representative target tissue for detection of
PRRSV in sows, and
- PRRSV may reside in sites other than tonsil in naturally infected sows.
Therefore, it is important that practitioners understand the limitations of tonsil
biopsy before using this technique to detect PRRSV-infected sows when the goal
is elimination of PRRSV from infected populations.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the University of Minnesota Agricultural
Experiment Station and PIC for providing the necessary financial support for this project.
References-refereed
1. Cavanaugh D. Nidovirales: A new order
comprising Coronoviridae and Arteriviridae. Arch
Virol. 1997;142:629-633.
2. Wills RW, Zimmerman JJ, Yoon KJ, Swenson SL, McGinely MJ, Hill HT, Platt KB,
Christopher-Hennings J, Nelson EA. PRRS virus: a
persistent infection. Vet Micro. 1997;55:231-240.
5. Collins JE, Dee SA, Halbur P, Lautner B,
McCaw M, Polson D, Rodibaugh M, Sanford E, Yeske
P. Laboratory diagnosis of PRRS virus infection.
Swine Health Prod. 1996;4:33-35.
6. Dee SA, Molitor TW. Elimination of PRRS
virus using test and removal process. Vet
Rec. 1998;143: 474-476.
7. Dee SA, Molitor TW, Rossow KD. Epidemiological and diagnostic observations following the
elimination of PRRS virus from a breeding herd of
pigs by the test and removal protocol. Vet
Rec. 2000;146: 211-213.
8. Kluge JP, Beran GW, Hill HT, Platt KB.
Pseudorabies (Aujeszky's Disease). In: Straw BE,
D'Allaire S, Mengeling WL, Taylor DJ, eds. Diseases of
Swine. 8th ed. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University
Press. 1999:233-246.
9. Nielsen R, Thomsen AD, Vesterland SD.
Pleuropneumonia caused by Haemophilus
parahaemolyticus: An attempt to control the
disease at two progeny testing stations by serological
blood testing followed by removal of the seropositive
animals and their litter mates. Nord Vet
Med. 1976;28:349-352.
11. Dee SA, Joo HS, Henry S, Tokach L, Park BK, Molitor To, Pijoan C. Detecting
subpopulations after PRRS virus infection in large breeding
herds using multiple serologic tests. Swine Health
Prod. 1996;4:181-184.
13. Bautista EM, Goyal S, Yoon IJ, Joo HS,
Collins J. Comparison of porcine alveolar macrophages
and CL 2621 for the detection of PRRSV and anti-PRRS antibody.
J Vet Diagn Invest. 1993;5:163-165.
14. Halbur PG, Miller LD, Paul PS, Meng XJ, Huffman EL, Andrews JJ.
Immunohistochemical identification of PRRS virus antigen in the
heart and lymphoid system of 3 week old CDCD pigs.
Vet Pathol. 1995;32:200-204.
16. Yoon IJ, Joo HS, Christianson WT, Morrison RB, Dial GD. Persistent and contact infection
in nursery pigs experimentally infected with PRRS virus.
Swine Health Prod. 1993;1(4)5-8.
17. Christianson WT, Choi CS, Collins JE ,
Molitor TW, Morrison RB, Joo HS. Pathogenesis of
PRRS virus in mid-gestation sows and fetuses. Can J
Vet Res. 1993;57:262-268.
19. Gleason SC, Currier R, Quinlisk P. Public health response to a potentially rabid bear
cub. MMWR. 2000;48:971-973.
References - non-refereed
3. Wills RW, Doster AR, Galeota J, Sur JH,
Osorio FA. Duration of PRRS virus infections and
proportion of persistently infected pigs. Proc
3rd Int Symp PRRSV. 1999;139.
4. Benfield DA, Nelson J, Rowland RR, Lawson
SR, Steffen M, Rossow KD, Collins JE. Persistence
of PRRS virus. Proc AASP. 1999;305-308.
10. Tune KA, DeCesare B, Collins JE, Kapur V. New diagnostic tools for the detection of
infectious agents. Proc AD Leman Conf. 1997;170-172.
12. Kolb JR. Monitoring the risk of introducing PRRSV using tonsil biopsy, serum, buffy coat
and ORF 7 PCR in seropositive replacement animals.
Proc AASP. 1998;413-418.
15. Bierk MD, Dee SA, Rossow KD, Guedes MI, Molitor TW. A diagnostic investigation of
PRRS virus persistence in adult breeding swine.
Proc AASP. 2000;403-404.
18. Horter D, Pogranichy R, Chang CC, Yoon KJ, Zimmerman JJ. How long does PRRSV persist
in pigs after infection? Proc AASP. 2000;401-402.