Salmonella enterica in Superficial Cervical (Prescapular) and Ileocecal Lymph Nodes of Slaughtered Pigs

Bahnson, Peter B.; Snyder, Claudia; Omran, L.

doi:10.4315/0362-028x-69.4.925

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these 696 samples, 265 were gut-associated lymph nodes collected for another purpose. These samples were included in the quality control samples as they were more likely to be positive based on prior research (Hurd et al, 2001;Bahnson et al, 2006b) and therefore suitable for assessing detection ability of Salmonella in lymph node tissue using culture method compared with PCR detection. The other 431 were sub-iliac lymph node samples from both processing and cooler.…”

Section: Quality Control Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Limited small studies with relatively large variation in prevalence suggested that nongut-associated lymph nodes may be a candidate tissue for evaluation: 0% in 300 superficial cervical lymph nodes (Bahnson et al, 2006b); 0.4% (1 of 272); and 2% (4 of 181) in ventral thoracic lymph nodes and sub-iliac lymph nodes (Hurd et al, 2001;Larsen et al, 2003). On the basis of these data, sub-iliac lymph nodes were selected as the tissue for evaluation as a screening tool as these tissues are rarely positive and easy to collect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sub-Iliac Lymph Nodes at Slaughter Lack Ability to PredictSalmonella entericaPrevalence for Swine Farms

Wang

Wesley²,

McKean

et al. 2010

Foodborne Pathogens and Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess the value of deep systemic sub-iliac lymph nodes collected at slaughter as predictors of Salmonella prevalence in live hogs.An observational study was conducted on 24 farms fromSeptember 2006 to February 2009. At least one cohort of market-weight pigs was visited for each farm. Within each cohort, 30 farm fecal samples on farm and 30 sub-iliac lymph nodes from matched pigs at slaughter were collected. Samples were cultured for Salmonella enterica and serotyped by conventionalmethods. Overall, 3.4%(51 of 1490) of farmfeces and 0.06% (1 of 1739) of sub-iliac lymph nodes were Salmonella positive; 71.4% (15 of 21) of farms had at least one positive fecal sample, and 4.2% (1 of 24) had at least one positive sub-iliac lymph node. The median within-farm prevalence of Salmonella in farm fecal samples was 1.7%, ranging from 0% to 38.3%; for sub-iliac lymph nodes the median was 0%, ranging from 0% to 1.1%. The median within-cohort prevalence in farm fecal samples was 0%, ranging from0%to 43.3%; for sub-iliac lymph nodes the median was 0%, ranging from0%to 4%. The predominant serotype detected was Derby, followed by Anatum and Typhimurium (Copenhagen). Salmonella Braenderup was recovered from the sub-iliac lymph node. The low detection rate of Salmonella in sub-iliac lymph nodes (0.06%) limits its usefulness as a dependable predictor of Salmonella contamination originating on farm (3.4%). RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. The aim of this study was to assess the value of deep systemic sub-iliac lymph nodes collected at slaughter as predictors of Salmonella prevalence in live hogs. An observational study was conducted on 24 farms from September 2006 to February 2009. At least one cohort of market-weight pigs was visited for each farm. Within each cohort, 30 farm fecal samples on farm and 30 sub-iliac lymph nodes from matched pigs at slaughter were collected. Samples were cultured for Salmonella enterica and serotyped by conventional methods. Overall, 3.4% (51 of 1490) of farm feces and 0.06% (1 of 1739) of sub-iliac lymph nodes were Salmonella positive; 71.4% (15 of 21) of farms had at least one positive fecal sample, and 4.2% (1 of 24) had at least one positive sub-iliac lymph node. The median within-farm prevalence of Salmonella in farm fecal samples was 1.7%, ranging from 0% to 38.3%; for sub-iliac lymph nodes the median was 0%, ranging from 0% to 1.1%. The median within-cohort prevalence in farm fecal samples was 0%, ranging from 0% to 43.3%; for sub-iliac lymph nodes the median was 0%, ranging from 0% to 4%. The predominant serotype detected was Derby, followed by Anatum and Typhimurium (Copenhagen). Salmonella Braenderup was recovered from the sub-iliac lymph node. The low detection rate of Salmonella in sub-iliac lymph nodes (0.06%) limits its usefulness as a dependable predictor of Salmonella contamination originating on farm (3.4%).

show abstract

Section: Quality Control Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sub-Iliac Lymph Nodes at Slaughter Lack Ability to PredictSalmonella entericaPrevalence for Swine Farms

Wang

Wesley²,

McKean

et al. 2010

Foodborne Pathogens and Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limited small studies with relatively large variation in prevalence suggested non-gutassociated lymph nodes may be a candidate tissue for evaluation: 0% in 300 superficial cervical lymph nodes (Bahnson et al, 2006b); 0.4% (1 of 272); 2% (4 of 181) in ventral thoracic lymph nodes and sub-iliac lymph nodes Larsen et al, 2003).…”

Section: Serological Testing Of Diaphragm Muscle Meat Juice Samples Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these 696 samples, 265 were gut-associated lymph nodes collected for another purpose. These samples were included in the quality control samples as they were more likely to be positive based on prior research (Bahnson et al, 2006b; and therefore suitable for assessing detection ability of Salmonella in lymph node tissue using culture method compared to PCR detection. The other 431 were sub-iliac lymph node samples from both processing and cooler.…”

Section: Quality Control Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are few studies evaluating the magnitude of DTLNs' contribution to ground pork contamination. The current knowledge about Salmonella contamination in DTLNs is restricted to the reported low prevalence of DTLNs (Bahnson et al, 2006;Wang et al, 2010). However, a chain connecting the complex multiple stages of food preparation needs to be considered to assess the relative contribution of DTLNs on the Salmonella contamination in ground pork.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The exploration of methodological approaches for addressing the pre- and post-harvest Salmonella interventions

Wang

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

National survey of Salmonella prevalence in lymph nodes of sows and market hogs1

Bessire

Thomas

Gehring

et al. 2018

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock are known to harbor Salmonella in their gastrointestinal (GI) tract and lymphatic tissues. Pathogens may be transferred from the GI tract to external carcass surfaces during normal harvest procedures but can be mitigated by antimicrobial carcass interventions. Lymph nodes (LNs) are typically encased in fat and are protected from antimicrobial carcass surface treatments, thus serving as a possible root cause of foodborne illnesses attributed to Salmonella in meat products. Members of the pork industry are committed to food safety and want to better understand Salmonella as a potential contaminant in pork products. To establish a baseline of Salmonella prevalence in porcine LNs across the United States, 21 commercial pork harvest facilities, representing northern (n = 12) or southern (n = 9) geographical regions, participated in this study. As processing volumes allowed, 25 carcasses were selected from each establishment. From each carcass, left and right superficial inguinal LNs (n =1,014 LNs) were removed and pooled to yield one sample per animal or n = 507 total LN samples. Salmonella prevalence rates differed (P < 0.05) between hog types in both regions. Specifically, 6.4% of market hog and 37.0% of sow samples were Salmonella positive in the northern region. This was reversed in the southern region as 13.0% of market hog and 4.8% of sow samples were Salmonella positive. There also was a difference (P < 0.05) in prevalence rates between northern and southern regions for sows, but not market hogs (P > 0.05). Type of chilling method (conventional, blast, or other) used at each market hog facility (n = 12) was documented. In the northern region, prevalence rates of Salmonella across chilling types were as follows: 20.0%, 2.7%, and 1.3% positive samples for conventional, other, and blast chill methods, respectively. In the southern region, 20.0% of samples were positive for conventional, 0.0% for blast, and 12.0% for other chilling methods. In both regions, samples from conventionally chilled carcasses returned more (P < 0.05) positive results than any other chill method. Overall, the higher rate of Salmonella prevalence in northern sows warrants further investigation, and members of the pork industry would benefit from the identification of possible methods to address the presence of Salmonella in porcine LNs.

show abstract

Salmonella enterica in Superficial Cervical (Prescapular) and Ileocecal Lymph Nodes of Slaughtered Pigs

Cited by 9 publications

References 9 publications

Sub-Iliac Lymph Nodes at Slaughter Lack Ability to PredictSalmonella entericaPrevalence for Swine Farms

Sub-Iliac Lymph Nodes at Slaughter Lack Ability to PredictSalmonella entericaPrevalence for Swine Farms

The exploration of methodological approaches for addressing the pre- and post-harvest Salmonella interventions

National survey of Salmonella prevalence in lymph nodes of sows and market hogs1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About