The sensitizing effect of a Brucella abortus antigen in cattle after repeated intradermal inoculations

Bercovich, Z.; Muskens, J

doi:10.1016/0378-1135(96)00005-3

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An ideal allergen should not modify the immune status of an animal in any way which could interfere with diagnostic tests. In contrast with what has been observed by Cunningham and others (1980) and Bercovich and others (1996) when using other Brucella antigens, when brucellin was injected monthly up to eight times, it did not induce any detectable anti‐LPS antibodies, as demonstrated by the negative serological results, and the absence of sensitisation of T cells as demonstrated by the absence of an allergic reaction in the skin test.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

Diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by skin test: conditions for the test and evaluation of its performance

Saegerman

Waele

et al. 1999

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brucellergene OCB (Rhône-Mérieux) was used as an allergen to define the intrinsic parameters of a skin test and to compare its properties with serology for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. The skin test was also evaluated for its capacity to solve problems associated with false positive reactions in serological tests. The optimal reading delay for the skin test was 72 hours. The brucellosis allergic reaction was two to three times less intense than the tuberculosis allergic reaction. An increase of 1.1 mm or more in the skin thickness was therefore considered to be an adequate cut-off. The specificity calculated for 1192 brucellosis-free animals (including animals from brucellosis-free herds in which false positive serological reactions had been reported) was 99-83 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval [CI] 99-40 to 99-98 per cent). The sensitivity determined from 27 experimentally infected heifers ranged from 93 per cent (95 per cent CI 76 to 100 per cent) to 78 per cent (95 per cent CI 58 to 91 per cent) when measured respectively one and six months after the infection. Allergic reactions could be detected in vaccinated animals up to four-and-a-half years after the vaccination. On the other hand, no sensitisation was recorded in naïve animals after up to eight monthly injections of the allergen. The skin test gave valuable information, in combination with the serological tests, in both acute and chronic brucellosis. The skin test discriminated brucellosis clearly from false positive serological reactions due to infections with Yersinia enterocolitica O9.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

Diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by skin test: conditions for the test and evaluation of its performance

Saegerman

Waele

et al. 1999

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This, however, can only be done when the brucellin does not sensitize cattle to subsequent SDTH tests, does not test false-positive in cattle infected with microorganisms that cross-react serologically with Brucella antigen, and does not induce a (de- tectable) serological immune response. Studies showed that cattle that have been experimentally inoculated with microorganisms known serologically to crossreact with B. abortus antigen did not have a skin reaction 22 mm following two injections of (100 in protein) 0.1 ml brucellin (20). Likewise, naive cattle did not have an increase in skinfold thickness >2 mm after repeated injection of 0.1 ml brucellin.…”

Section: Sensitizing and Immunogenic Properties Of Brucellin 273mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, SAT, CFT, and ELISA titres may rise after a single SDTH test in cattle infected with microorganisms that serologically cross-react with B. abortus (20). Therefore, one could argue that the SDTH test should not be used where control, eradication, and surveillance of brucellosis is based on serological testing.…”

Section: Sensitizing and Immunogenic Properties Of Brucellin 273mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It seems that an increase in skinfold thickness >2 mm at the injection site of brucellin may be used as guideline to indicate brucellosis in infected cattle (71). When this cut-off value was applied to naive cattle, none showed a skin reaction 22 mm following several brucellin injections (20). Under field conditions only 6/896 naive cattle had an increase in skinfold thickness 22 mm at the injection site of the brucellin, indicating 99.3% specificity.…”

Section: The Value Of the Sdth Test For Surveillance And Eradication mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The use of skin delayed‐type hypersensitivity as an adjunct test to diagnose brucellosis in cattle: A review

Bercovich¹

2000

Veterinary Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systematic review of current immunological tests for the diagnosis of cattle brucellosis

Ducrotoy

Muñoz

Conde-Álvarez

et al. 2018

Preventive Veterinary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sensitizing effect of a Brucella abortus antigen in cattle after repeated intradermal inoculations

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

Diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by skin test: conditions for the test and evaluation of its performance

Diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by skin test: conditions for the test and evaluation of its performance

The use of skin delayed‐type hypersensitivity as an adjunct test to diagnose brucellosis in cattle: A review

A systematic review of current immunological tests for the diagnosis of cattle brucellosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About