Foot-and-Mouth Disease in Pigs: Current Epidemiological Situation
A review of the aetiology, transmission, diagnosis, prevention and control of foot and mouth disease (FMD) were outlined by Emilio A. León at the Institute of Pathobiology at Castelar, Argentina, at the International Symposium on Emerging and Re-Emerging Diseases in Pigs in 2011.Introduction
Foot and mouth disease (FMD) is a global problem,
affecting productivity and trade where it is endemic, and
requiring strong investments in preventing measures and
surveillance where it has been eradicated.
According to the Manual of Diagnostic Tests and
Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals of OIE (2010) FMD is the most
contagious disease of mammals and has a great potential for
causing severe economic loss in susceptible animals.
Aetiology
FMD is caused by FMD virus (FMDV), which belongs
to the genus Ahtovirus, family Picornaviridae. There are seven
serotypes of FMDV namely, O, A, C, SAT 1, SAT 2, SAT 3 and
Asia 1. Infection with one serotype does not confer immunity
against another.
Some FMDV strains have a pronounced predilection for
one livestock species or another.
Susceptible species
All members of the order Artiodactyla (cloven-hooved
mammals) can be infected by FMDV, as well as a few species
in other orders.
Cattle are normally the most frequently involved in
epidemics. Small ruminants, deer and buffalos may be naturally
infected. However, they show little or none clinical signs.
The disease is generally most severe in cattle and pigs.
Under certain conditions, pigs may play an important
role on the transmission of the agent.
Transmission
Pigs may become infected with FMDV by eating
contaminated products, by direct contact with another
infected animal, or by being placed in a heavily contaminated
environment.
Probably the respiratory route is the more usual portal
of entry for pigs, even if they may require as much as 600 times
more than the exposure to aerosol virus required by a bovine
or an ovine, to cause infection. On the other hand, pigs are
much more susceptible to infection by the oral route than are
ruminants.
Excretion of the virus can begin up to four days before
the onset of clinical signs. This is of great epidemiological
significance. The agent is excreted in large quantities in
expired air, in all secretions and excretions and from ruptured
vesicles. Pigs may liberate vast quantities of airborne virus in
their expired breath, about 3,000 times as much as cattle.
Once infection is established within a pig herd, transmission by
direct contact between infected and susceptible animals can
be very rapid, and many routes of viral entry may be involved.
Maximum excretion of virus coincides with development of
clinical disease and lesions on the snout, tongue and feet,
and declines over the following three to five days as the antibody
response develops.
Unlike ruminants that have recovered from FMD
infection, pigs do not become carriers, and there is no evidence
of viral ribonucleic acid persisting in infected pigs after three or four weeks of becoming infected.
Clinical Signs and Lesions
Incubation period in natural conditions varies with virus
strain, the exposure dose and the route of entry. It may vary
from 24 hours to 11-14 days.
The disease is characterised by fever and vesicles
on the feet, in and around the mouth, and on the mammary
gland. In pigs the more severe lesions usually occur in the feet.
Vesicles develop on the coronary band and in the interdigital
space. Lesions at other sites are less frequent and less severe.
Young pigs up to 14 weeks may die suddenly due to heart
failure; piglets are particularly susceptible.
Incidence of disease in not immunised populations can
be as high as 100 per cent. Mortality rate in adult animals is usually
negligible but it can be extremely high in suckling piglets.
Diagnosis
In farms presenting high mortality of piglets and a
significant proportion of pigs showing lameness, fever and
vesicular lesions, FMD should be strongly suspected. Actions
should be taken immediately to secure a definitive diagnosis
and prevent further spread on the agent.
In the laboratory, FMD can be diagnosed by virus
isolation, detection of viral antigens, and serology.
Pigs may be affected by other vesicular diseases, which
are clinically indistinguishable from FMD. Therefore, laboratory
diagnosis of any suspected FMD case in pigs is therefore a
matter of urgency.
Other pig vesicular diseases are:
- Vesicular stomatitis (VS): may affect horses and cattle as well
(sheep and goats may be experimentally infected). Two distinct
immunological classes of VS virus have been recognised: New
Jersey and Indiana. It is endemic in northern parts of South
America and all Central America, being less frequent in USA. It
is not present in other continents.
- Swine vesicular disease (SVD): does not affect other species.
It can be a subclinical, mild or severe vesicular condition
depending on the strain of virus involved, the route and dose of
infection, and the husbandry conditions under which the pigs
are kept. Recent outbreaks of SVD have been characterised
by less severe or no clinical signs; infection has been detected
when samples are tested for a serosurveillance programme or
for export certification. The last report to OIE from a European
country was from Portugal in 2007: one farm was affected, with a
population of 1,800 pigs. All were eliminated by stamping out.
The origin of the outbreak remains unknown.
- Vesicular exanthema (VES): does not affect other species. It was originated in California and became widespread in the USA during the 1950s but a vigorous campaign to eradicate the disease was successful. In 1959, the USA was declared free of VES, and the disease was designated a foreign animal disease. It has never been reported as a natural infection of pigs in any other part of the world.
World Epidemiological Situation
During 2010, a total of 716 outbreaks of FMD were
notified to OIE, affecting 21 countries from two continents:
Africa and Asia. These records are the result of immediate
notifications, meaning that cases occurring in endemic
countries are not included.
Some data concerning those 716 outbreaks are
presented in Table 1, which shows the number of susceptible animals
exposed to the virus, diseased, dead, destroyed and
slaughtered animals. The source is OIE World Animal Health Information System, OIE (WAHIS), 2010.
Table 1. Data of 716 FMD outbreaks from 2010 notified to OIE and recorded in WAHIS
Almost 14,000 pigs were directly affected, producing
more than 8,000 deaths (estimated mortality rate 60 per cent).
The 716 outbreaks were due to the following FMDV
serotype: A: 14 (two per cent); O: 665 (93 per cent); SAT1: 6 (one per cent); SAT2: 16
(two per cent) and Asia1: 15 (two per cent).
As a consequence of these outbreaks, near 300,000
pigs were destroyed. These are the direct cost of the disease.
Economical losses in terms of international trade interruption
and costs of control measures should be added to the direct
costs in order to have a rough estimation of general losses.
The role of pigs in the epidemiology of FMD is not the
same everywhere. Firstly, it strongly depends on the production
system, in countries or areas having high density of pig farms
the role of this species may be crucial. Secondly, it depends
on the host tropism of the FMDV strain; for instance, the 1997
FMD epidemic that took place in Taiwan was due to type O/
Taiwan/97, which produced high morbidity and mortality in
pigs, but did not affect cattle.
Measures of Prevention
In FMD–free areas or countries, import control including
quarantine, is the first line of defence.
Import quarantine policy
should include pre-export testing and quarantine, animal
heath certification and any necessary post-arrival inspection
testing and quarantine. These policies should be based on the
results of risk analyses. Border inspection posts (in airports,
seaports and borders) should be able to properly intercept
all risk products and animals.
The swill feeding to pigs is
a major way of introducing FMD into a country. Therefore,
consideration should be given to banning swill feeding or at
least implementing practices that will make it safe.
Control Measures
In both, endemic areas and areas that suffered reintroduction of FMDV, the control measures have the objective of reducing the reproductive rate (the average number of new cases produced by an infected individual in a time period). As for any other transmissible disease, those measures include three possible independent strategies:
- Eliminating sources of infection: firstly, the sources of infection should be identified. Sources of infection are infected animals, contaminated premises, tools, vehicles, wild animals and others. Once identified, the sources of infection have to be eliminated by means of stamping out, slaughtering, disinfection, biocontention measures.
- Interrupting contact between infected and susceptible individuals: movement interdictions, sanitary barriers, zoning, bioexclusion measures.
- Decreasing proportion of susceptible animals: vaccination programmes. None of these strategies is perfect. For that reason the simultaneous implementation of more than one strategy is convenient.
Both free and infected areas need to have in place an
effective programme of early detection and rapid response.
For early detection it is necessary:
- all those involved in the animal production chain must be aware of FMD clinical signs and the procedures for notification
- members of the official veterinary services have to be regularly trained, including simulation exercises
- having a specialist FMD diagnostic team
- laboratory diagnostic capabilities for rapid and certain diagnosis
- access to a network of international reference laboratories
- implementation of passive and active epidemiological surveillance programmes.
Due to the high transmissibility of FMDV, the control measures taken in endemic areas will have little probability of success if they are taken individually by a country or area. The control policies have to be undertaken at regional basis. For that, strong collaboration and transparency between parts are needed.
References
1. OIE. 2012. Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals - Chapter 2.1.5. Foot and Mouth Disease.2. Kitching, R.P. and Alexandersen, S. 2002. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 21(3):513-518.
3. Geering, W.A. and Lubroth, J. 2002. FAO Animal Health Manual No. 16. Preparation of foot-and-mouth disease contingency plans. ISSN 1020-5187.
4. Orvid Spickler, A., Roth, J.A., Gaylon, J., Lofstedt, J. 2010. Emerging and Exotic Diseases of Animals, 4th Ed. Iowa State University. ISBN 978-0-9745525-8-3.
Further Reading
- | You can view the full report by clicking here. |
Further Reading
- | Find out more information on foot and mouth disease (FMD) by clicking here. |
April 2012