Dájer AAF, Gutiérrez REJ, Zapata VDM

Language: English/Spanish
References: 13
Page: 167-171
PDF size: 413.13 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Negative sera from vaccinated (322) and non-vaccinated (248) brucellosis free bovine herds, and positive sera (90) to Rose Bengal Plate Test (RB), and Complement Fixation Test (FC) from Brucella abortus infected herds were used to determine relative sensitivity and specificity of an indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (I-ELISA) and a Rivanol Agglutination Test (RIV). Test agreement using Kappa analysis was determined using 698 sera. The I-ELISA had a sensitivity of 100%, and a specificity of 92.8%. The RIV had a sensitivity of 97.8%, and a specificity of 100%. Agreement (Kappa) for I-ELISA and FC was 0.73, for I-ELISA and RIV 0.74, for I-ELISA and RB 0.79, and for RIV and FC it was 0.96. Predictive values (PV) for I-ELISA of 66.9% for positive and 100% for negative ones, and for RIV of 100% for positives and 99.7% for negative ones were also determined. It is concluded that the I-ELISA could be used as a screening test under the Yucatan State conditions, or as a confirmatory test in places where vaccination is not being carried out. The RIV lacked sensitivity, and is therefore, not recommended for final stages of eradication programs, but could be used as a confirmatory test in control programs or in early stages in eradication campaigns.

REFERENCES

1. Secretaría de Agricultura y Recursos Hidráulicos. Memorias del Primer Symposium Internacional de Actualización en Brucelosis; 1994 marzo 11-12; México, D.F. México (DF): SARH/SSA, 1994.

2. López-Merino A, López-SR, Ocampo AD, Hernández- Monroy I, González-Domínguez F. Brucelosis, avances y perspectivas. Mexico (DF): Publicación Técnica del INDRE No. 6. 1991.

3. Dajer-Abimerhi A, Gutierrez-Ruiz E, Honhold N, Zapata- Villalobos D, Villegas-Perez S. Comparison of five serological tests to detect Brucella abortus antibodies and a report on prevalence of the disease in livestock in the State of Yucatan, Mexico. Proceedings of the Final Research Co-ordination Meeting of the FAO/IAE/SIDA Research Co-ordination Programme; 1990 October 22-26; Heredia, Costa Rica. Heredia. Costa Rica: FAO/IAEA, 1992:131-137.

4. Wright PF, Nilsson E, Van Rooij EMA, Lelenta M, Jeggo MH. Standardization and validation of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay techniques for the detection of antibody in infectious disease diagnosis. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epizoot 1993;12(2):435-450.

5. Jacobson RJ, Spencer T, Edwards S, Jeggo MH, Wright. Expression and evaluation of ELISA data in serological tests used for infectious disease control in animals. Report of Joint FAO/IAEA Meeting on ELISA Data Evaluation and Expression; 1992; Viena, Austria. Viena, Austria: FAO/IAEA, 1992: 1-21.

6. Alton GG, Jones LM, Pietz DE. Laboratory techniques in brucellosis. 2nd ed. Geneva, Switzerland, WHO, 1975.

7. Ciprian A, Mancera A, Flores R, Ramírez C. Serodiagnóstico en brucelosis. En: Morilla A, Bautista CR, editores. Manual de inmunología. México (DF): Diana, 198:193-223.

8. Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food. Standard laboratory techniques for brucellosis diagnosis. Weybridge (UK): Central Veterinary Laboratory, 1991.

9. Thrusfield MV. Epidemiología veterinaria. Zaragoza, España: Acribia, 1990:175- 186.

10. Martin SW, Meek AH, Willeberg P. Veterinary epidemiology, principles and methods. Ames (IA): Iowa State University Press, 1987.

11. Center for Disease Control. EPI INFO (computer program) version 5.01b. Atlanta (GE): Epidemiology Programme Office, CDC/World Health Organization, 1991.

12. Portsmann T, Kiessig ST. Enzyme immunoassay techniques. J Immunol Methods 1992;150:5-21.

13. Metcalf HE. Control of bovine brucellosis in the U.S.A. In: Woods GT, editor. Practices in veterinary public health and preventive medicine in the United States. Ames (IA): Iowa State University Press, 1986:97-100.