194 articles – 65 Notices  [english version]
Fiche concise
Assessment of the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of an indirect ELISA kit for the diagnosis of Brucella ovis infection in rams.
Praud A., Champion J.-L., Corde Y., Drapeau A., Meyer L., Garin-Bastuji B.
BMC Veterinary Research 8, 1 (2012) 68 - http://www.hal.inserm.fr/inserm-00716039
 (22640401) 
Assessment of the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of an indirect ELISA kit for the diagnosis of Brucella ovis infection in rams.
Anne Praud1, Jean-Luc Champion2, Yannick Corde3, Antoine Drapeau3, Laurence Meyer4, Bruno Garin-Bastuji () 3
1 :  Epi-MAI - Unité Epidémiologie des maladies animales infectieuses
Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort – ANSES
94700, Maisons-Alfort
France
2 :  Groupement de Défense Sanitaire des Alpes de Haute Provence
Groupement de Défense Sanitaire des Alpes de Haute Provence
04000, Digne les Bains
France
3 :  Laboratoire de santé animale de Maisons-Alfort
http://www.anses.fr/
ANSES
23, avenue du Général de Gaulle 94706 MAISONS-ALFORT Cedex
France
4 :  CESP - Centre de recherche en épidémiologie et santé des populations
INSERM : U1018 – Université Paris XI - Paris Sud – Hôpital Paul Brousse – Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP)
16 avenue Paul Vaillant Couturier 94807 Villejuif Cedex, France
France
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Brucella ovis causes an infectious disease responsible for infertility and subsequent economic losses in sheep production. The standard serological test to detect B. ovis infection in rams is the complement fixation test (CFT), which has imperfect sensitivity and specificity in addition to technical drawbacks. Other available tests include the indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (I-ELISA) but no I-ELISA kit has been fully evaluated. The study aimed to compare an I-ELISA kit and the standard CFT. Our study was carried out on serum samples from 4599 rams from the South of France where the disease is enzootic. A Bayesian approach was used to estimate tests characteristics (diagnostic sensitivity, Se and diagnostic specificity, Sp). The tests were then studied together in order to optimise testing strategies to detect B. ovis. RESULTS: After optimising the cut-off values in order to avoid doubtful results without deteriorating the concordance between the results of the two tests, the I-ELISA appeared to be slightly more sensitive than CFT (Se I-ELISA = 0.917 [0.822; 0.992], 95% Credibility Interval (CrI) compared to Se CFT = 0.860 [0.740; 0.967], 95% CrI). However, CFT was slightly more specific than IELISA (Sp CFT = 0.988 [0.947; 1.0], 95% CrI) compared to Sp I-ELISA =0.952 [0.901; 1.0], 95% CrI). The tests were then associated with two different interpretation schemes. The series association increased the specificity of screening and could be used for pre-movement testing in rams from uninfected flocks. The parallel association increased sequence sensitivity, thus appearing more suitable for eradicating the disease in infected flocks. CONCLUSIONS: The high sensitivity and acceptable specificity of this I-LISA kit support its potential interest to avoid the limitations of CFT. The two tests could also be used together or combined with other diagnostic methods such as semen culture to improve the testing strategy. The choice of test sequence and interpretation criteria depends on the epidemiological context, screening objectives and the financial and practical constraints.
Sciences du Vivant/Biologie animale/Médecine vétérinaire et santé animal
Sciences du Vivant/Médecine humaine et pathologie/Maladies infectieuses
Anglais
1746-6148

Articles dans des revues avec comité de lecture
10.1186/1746-6148-8-68
BMC Veterinary Research
Publisher BioMed Central
ISSN 1746-6148 
internationale
28/05/2012
28/05/2012
8
1
68

Brucella ovis – Diagnostic tests – CFT – I-ELISA – Sensitivity – Specificity – Bayesian approach
Liste des fichiers attachés à ce document : 
PDF
1746-6148-8-68.pdf(220.2 KB)
ANNEX
1746-6148-8-68.xml(52.8 KB)