PubMed · 1997 · 35 citations · 0 references
Open access
Veterinary MedicineInfectious DiseasesVeterinary MicrobiologyDiagnostic MicrobiologyMedical MicrobiologyZoonotic Disease EpidemiologySerological DiagnosticsVeterinary Diagnostic MicrobiologyZoonotic Disease DetectionZoonotic Disease DiagnosisZoonotic Disease PathologyBovine Skin DiseaseBrucella DetectionBrucella SpeciesBrucellosis ScreeningFalse Positive ReactionsOvine Skin DiseaseSkin Test Interpretation
Three experiments were performed in order to assess the diagnostic value of the Brucellin allergic skin test (AST) in a brucellosis false positive serological reactions (FPSR) context. First, 1259 cattle from 20 Brucella-free herds in a FPSR area were tested twice with AST to estimate its specificity. Secondly, AST and serological tests (complement fixation test [CFT], tube agglutination test, dithiothreitol-microagglutination test and ELISA) sensitivities were evaluated on 111 cattle positive to the Rose Bengal test (RBT) belonging to 15 Brucella-infected herds. Thirdly, AST was used in a field trial to discriminate FPSR from true brucellosis reactions. AST specificity in non-vaccinated cattle was very high (99.83%; confidence interval 95% [CI95%]: 99.67-99.96%). Skin thickening 72 h post-injection was significantly higher on vaccinated cattle (1.42 vs 0.15 mm). In this sub-population, AST specificity decreased significantly to 78% (CI95%: 68-87%). Individual sensitivity of AST relative to Rose Bengal test was 64% (CI95%: 54-72%), while all infected herds were AST positive (n = 15). When associated with CFT, it detected 95% (CI95%: 90-98%) of the infected cattle. These results were consistent with the field trial. In a FPSR context, AST was more specific than RBT or CFT. Therefore, this test could be used at herd level as a confirmation test, on cattle non vaccinated against brucellosis.