ReviewMicroorganisms2025
Evolution of Porcine Virus Isolation: Guidelines for Practical Laboratory Application.
Review in Microorganisms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cell cultures are an essential tool for laboratory diagnosis of porcine viral infections. However, interpreting the results requires considering the species and tissue origin of cell lines as well as the specific virus replication characteristics (cytopathic effect). This guide discusses the development of techniques for the primary isolation of viruses from biological material and provides recommendations for culturing viruses in different cell types. According to the World Organization for Animal Health, laboratory diagnosis should aim to isolate the virus in cell culture. We have studied the evolution of virus isolation methods for various diseases affecting pigs, including African swine fever virus (ASFV), classical swine fever virus (CSFV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), pseudorabies virus (Aujeszky's disease, PRV), rotaviruses (RV), teschoviruses (PTVs), swine pox virus (SwPV), swine influenza A virus (IAVs), parvovirus (PPV), coronaviruses, circoviruses (PCVs), diseases with vesicular syndrome, and others. During our analysis of the literature and our own experience, we found that the porcine kidney (PK-15) cell line is the most suitable for isolating most viral porcine pathogens. For ASFV and PRRSV, the porcine alveolar macrophages (PAMs) continue to remain the primary model for isolation. These findings can serve as a starting point for virological reference laboratories to select optimal conditions for cultivating, obtaining field isolates, and strain adaptation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.