Putative peripheral neuropathy in suckling piglets

Citation
G. Salyi et al., Putative peripheral neuropathy in suckling piglets, J VET MED B, 47(6), 2000, pp. 401-410
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Veterinary Medicine/Animal Health
Journal title
JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE SERIES B-INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND VETERINARYPUBLIC HEALTH
ISSN journal
09311793 → ACNP
Volume
47
Issue
6
Year of publication
2000
Pages
401 - 410
Database
ISI
SICI code
0931-1793(200008)47:6<401:PPNISP>2.0.ZU;2-Q
Abstract
Over a period of almost 2 years, a progressive motor disturbance was found to occur in 20-50% of the litters of both primiparous and multiparous sows in a large pig herd of 1000 sows. The motor disturbance sometimes affected the entire litter; however, in most cases only a few piglets per litter wer e affected. The clinical signs appeared at 3-5 days of age and consisted of difficult movement followed by anteflexion or retroflexion of the tarsal j oints or 'rabbit-like posture'. Subsequently, primarily after weaning, infl ammatory and necrotic lesions developed on the paralysed limbs as a result of secondary infections of injuries. The tibial nerve and the common fibula r nerve of recently affected (5- to 6-day-old) piglets showed degeneration, demyelination and necrosis of some of the nerve fibres, accompanied by res torative changes in more chronic cases. The central nervous system, bones, skeletal muscles, tendons and joints showed no lesions that could have acco unted for the symptoms of motor disturbance. Aetiological investigations ex cluded the possibility of lead, copper and cadmium toxicity. Vitamin B-2 ad ministered orally at 1 day old proved to be ineffective. The disease did no t develop in piglets of sows kept at another farm under the same management and fed a diet prepared according to an identical formula from the same in gredients as those used on the affected farm, but with no milk whey added. This raised the suspicion of triaryl phosphate (TAP) poisoning, but this wa s found not to be the cause of the disease. New boars had not been brought to the farm in the year preceding the onset of disease, and the disease cou ld not be linked to a specific boar or boar line. The aetiology of the dise ase has remained unclear.