2004
DOI: 10.1590/s0102-09352004000500002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prevalência da tuberculose em bovinos abatidos em Minas Gerais

Abstract: A prevalência da tuberculose em bovinos abatidos em Minas Gerais, de 1993 a 1997, em 10 matadouros sujeitos à Inspeção Federal, foi de 0,7‰. Os bovinos procederam principalmente deste Estado (74%) e de Goiás (25%). A prevalência variou, temporal e espacialmente, entre zero e 8,7‰ e é idêntica à de outros levantamentos parciais feitos no Brasil desde 1924. Contribuíram para ela o local de abate e o perfil dos bovinos abatidos. Em Minas Gerais foi de 0,8‰ e em Goiás 0,4‰. A tuberculose foi diagnosticada em 90 mu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
7
0
4

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
7
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Reasons why animals delayed to react may include the inherent chronicity of the disease, or an initial desensitization. While the exact numbers of the prevalence of the disease in Brazil remain unknown (Riet-Correa & Garcia 2007), an apparent mean prevalence of 1-2% has been indicated in reports of limited herd testing (Poletto et al 2004, Oliveira et al 2007, Associação Brasileira de Buiatria 2010) and slaughtering (Andrade et al 1991, Fernandes et al 2003, Ribeiro et al 2003, Baptista et al 2004. In addition, surveys at abattoirs may invariably underestimate tuberculosis prevalence, since the usual line of slaughter is too fast and may not spare the time required to search for lesions, and thus only the most evident lesions are likely to be observed in such way.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reasons why animals delayed to react may include the inherent chronicity of the disease, or an initial desensitization. While the exact numbers of the prevalence of the disease in Brazil remain unknown (Riet-Correa & Garcia 2007), an apparent mean prevalence of 1-2% has been indicated in reports of limited herd testing (Poletto et al 2004, Oliveira et al 2007, Associação Brasileira de Buiatria 2010) and slaughtering (Andrade et al 1991, Fernandes et al 2003, Ribeiro et al 2003, Baptista et al 2004. In addition, surveys at abattoirs may invariably underestimate tuberculosis prevalence, since the usual line of slaughter is too fast and may not spare the time required to search for lesions, and thus only the most evident lesions are likely to be observed in such way.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study found that, according to the SIE, based on the occurrence of gross lesions suggestive of BTB (0.071%), this disease is present in the cattle herd of the state of Ceará. Condemnation of cattle carcasses with suspicion of BTB were previously reported by Baptista et al (2004), who found a prevalence of 0.07% of suggestive lesions in animals slaughtered in Minas Gerais. There is a wide variation in BTB prevalence from postmortem inspection of cattle in Brazil (0.17 to 5.16%).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…The prevalence identified in this study was like that presented by PNCEBT (Brasil 2006) and lower than that found by Barbieri et al (2016), although these studies used another diagnostic method (the tuberculin test). Oliveira et al (1986) and Baptista et al (2004), who conducted similar studies in slaughterhouses, reported similar prevalence rates in the state of MG. This similarity demonstrates that the use of the inspection by the SIF as an indicator of prevalence in certain regions covered by the slaughterhouses can evolve as an auxiliary tool for epidemiological surveillance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…It is already clear in the literature that the prevalence of bTB calculated in slaughterhouses is underestimated compared to its prevalence in the general population, given that bTB cases without macroscopic lesions, which are not detectable during a post mortem examination, should be added to this prevalence to come close to the reality (Corner 1994, Baptista et al 2004, Teklul et al 2004). However, this form of diagnosis may be considered as an indicator to provide information regarding the presence of herds infected by the disease, as the animals discarded and sent to slaughterhouses do not constitute a random sample (Asseged et al 2004, Furlanetto et al 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%