Premium
Liver fluke ( Fasciola hepatica ) co‐infection with bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in cattle: A retrospective animal‐level assessment of bTB risk in dairy and beef cattle
Author(s) -
Byrne Andrew W.,
McBride Stewart,
Graham Jordon,
LahuertaMarin Angela,
McNair Jim,
Skuce Robin A.,
McDowell Stanley W.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
transboundary and emerging diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.392
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1865-1682
pISSN - 1865-1674
DOI - 10.1111/tbed.13083
Subject(s) - fasciola hepatica , liver fluke , dairy cattle , bovine tuberculosis , veterinary medicine , beef cattle , cattle diseases , biology , zoology , helminths , tuberculosis , medicine , mycobacterium bovis , immunology , pathology , mycobacterium tuberculosis
Bovine tuberculosis (bTB), caused by Mycobacterium bovis , remains a persistent problem for cattle industries in endemic countries. The frequency, quality, and performance of tests, and the presence of wildlife reservoirs, have been identified as impediments to eradication. Recently, exposure to helminth infection ( Fasciola hepatica ) has been associated negatively with the disclosure of bTB. Here, for the first time, we assess impact of concurrent infections of Fasciola hepatica and the disclosure of bTB at the animal‐level using large surveillance datasets. We utilized a dataset of 138,566 animal records from an abattoir from Northern Ireland (2011–2013). The presence of F. hepatica infection was assessed from macroscopic tissue inspection at abattoir. Multivariable models were developed to assess co‐infection associations with bTB status based on: Single Intradermal Comparative Tuberculin Test (SICTT), lesion, bacteriological confirmation, including either all animals, or only skin‐test negative animals (lesions at routine slaughter; LRS; confirmed nonreactors at routine slaughter; cNRs) or positive (reactors) animals alone, respectively. The relationship between skin tuberculin reaction sizes and fluke status was also explored for a subset of animals with field recordings ( n = 24,680). Controlling for known risk factors (e.g., climatic, herd, and individual level characteristics), we did not find significant associations between the SICTT (standard or severe interpretation), lesion, nor confirmation status of animals and their liver fluke status. The only exception was a negative association between liver fluke positivity, and LRS or cNRs, respectively; though effect‐sizes were small (e.g., LRS Odds‐Ratio: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76–1.00). There was limited evidence of a relationship between tuberculin reaction sizes during SICTT testing and liver fluke infection status. These data do not support the contention that the detection of bTB using skin‐tests or reactor postmortem follow‐up may be compromised by co‐infection at a population level, but the relationship with lesion formation (pathogenesis) may indicate an impact for postmortem surveillance.