Suchergebnisse

AbstractHepatitis E virus (HEV) is a foodborne zoonotic pathogen and known as the causative agent of hepatitis E in humans. The specific role of porcine liver as a vehicle for human HEV infections has been highlighted in different studies. Nevertheless, gaps of knowledge still exist regarding possible HEV cross-contamination both at consumer and production level. Furthermore, people working in the food production industry, e.g. veterinarians and abattoir employees, are exposed to an increased risk of HEV infection. The aim of the present study was to investigate HEV cross-contamination on the surface of porcine liver in a German abattoir. The sample set included 250 samples of porcine liver parenchyma and the corresponding 250 superficial layer samples of the same livers, which were analyzed for the presence of HEV ribonucleic acid (RNA). Afterwards, the initial status of the tested liver parenchyma was compared with the occurrence of HEV RNA in the corresponding superficial layer. HEV RNA was detectable in 34% (85/250) of superficial layer samples, with 58% (49/85) of the samples originated from initially HEV negative livers. To our knowledge, this is the first study that provides an insight in the potential of HEV cross-contamination at abattoir level in Germany. Furthermore, it could be identified that the joint storage of livers in Euro meat containers has a significant impact on the presence of HEV RNA on the surface of porcine liver.

AbstractThis article presents a mathematical model for the Enterobacteriaceae count on the surface of broiler chicken during slaughter and how it may be affected by different processing technologies. The model is based on a model originally developed for Campylobacter and has been adapted for Enterobacteriaceae using a Bayesian updating approach and hitherto unpublished data gathered from German abattoirs. The slaughter process in the model consists of five stages: input, scalding, defeathering, evisceration, washing, and chilling.The impact of various processing technologies along the broiler processing line on the Enterobacteriaceae count on the carcasses' surface has been determined from literature data. The model is implemented in the software R and equipped with a graphical user interface which allows interactively to choose among different processing technologies for each stage along the processing line. Based on the choice of processing technologies the model estimates the Enterobacteriaceae count on the surface of each broiler chicken at each stage of processing. This result is then compared to a so‐called baseline model which simulates a processing line with a fixed set of processing technologies.The model calculations showed how even very effective removal of bacteria on the exterior of the carcass in a previous step will be undone by the cross‐contamination with leaked feces, if feces contain high concentrations of bacteria.

AbstractIn the highly automated processing in broiler abattoirs, some process steps reduce the bacterial counts and inactivate or remove pathogens, while others can lead to an increase. The present study compared the reduction of Enterobacteriaceae counts (EBCs) on breast skin samples in 3 broiler abattoirs using different scalding techniques: (A) conventional immersion scalding (360 s), (B) conventional immersion scalding with thermal treatment of the water (204 s), and (C) the AeroScalder® using hot, humid, saturated air as the scalding medium (360 s in air). In 3 commercial broiler abattoirs in Germany and The Netherlands, a total of 320 breast skin samples per abattoir (before and after scalding, after plucking, before and after chilling) and water samples from the scalders were taken and examined for EBC. After scalding, a significant EBC reduction by 0.7 log was determined only for the conventional immersion scalder (Abbatoir A); the reductions of the other 2 scalders were 0.1 log (Abattoir B) and 0.2 log (Abattoir C) and not statistically significant. The EBCs after scalding differed by up to 0.5 log cfu/g when the 3 scalders were compared, and these counts can be seen as similar. For all 3 abattoirs, the largest EBC reductions (p < 0.001) of 2.8 to 3.6 logs were found after plucking. Compared to the immersion scalders, EBCs in water samples were lowest in those taken from the AeroScalder®. Hence, we conclude that the conventional immersion scalders and the AeroScalder® reduced EBCs in a comparable manner. However, the greatest reductions in EBCs were seen after the plucking steps in the studied abattoirs, not after the scalding as such.

AbstractA practical and representative sampling method for microbiological examination of the slaughter process is useful for identifying abattoir-specific risk factors within the pig slaughter line. The aim of this study was to examine the suitability of an agar contact method (ACM), where the agar was homogenized before the microbiological processing, in comparison with the wet-dry double swabbing method (WDSM) for quantitative determination of total viable counts (TVC) on pig skin surfaces. In our experimental trial, pig skin pieces were artificially contaminated at 2 levels (3 log and 7 log cfu/ml) with a suspension of bacteria species commonly found on pig skin and cultivated in vitro. Within our field trial, pig carcasses were investigated at pre-chilling in an abattoir under standard processing conditions. For both sampling methods, TVC was determined, and statistical equivalence tests were calculated. Linear regression models showed the similarity of the sampling methods, with coefficient of determination (R2) > 90% and slope parameters of nearly 1 for both trials separately. Statistically significant equivalence between the 2 sampling methods was proven in both trials (with p < 0.0001 within an equivalence range of ± 0.5 log cfu/ml, respectively). The field trial revealed TVC on carcass surfaces sometimes at or below the lower detection limit for the ACM, while TVC from all carcasses were able to be determined by WDSM. Overall, low contamination levels were less reliably detectable by ACM than by WDSM. The ACM can be seen as an additional and suitable sampling procedure for pig skin and can contribute to the identification of abattoir specific risk factors for investigations of the hygienic status at process stages along the pig slaughter line.

AbstractIn the EU, a post-mortem inspection of finishing pigs comprises visual inspections of the carcass and offal followed by additional examinations, such as palpation and incision of parts, when needed. Moreover, it can include various laboratory tests. Since European meat inspection is regulated by the EU, one may assume that post-mortem inspection is performed in the same way in the Member States. However, previous studies showed that variations exist. This article shows the results of a survey performed in September 2020 on how visual meat inspection of finishing pigs is applied in Europe. By using a questionnaire, palpations, incisions and other procedures for 10 gross pathological findings and laboratory methods applied by official veterinarians to evaluate the fitness of meat for human consumption were assessed. We received 44 responses from 26 European countries. Most respondents reported that visual meat inspection was a generally applied inspection method. The main reason for not applying visual meat inspection was export requirements. The most important reasons for applying palpations and incisions in addition to visual inspection were findings detected in ante- or post-mortem inspection. There was considerable variation in the use of palpations and incisions, other post-mortem procedures and laboratory tests to assess meat fitness for human consumption. The respondents mentioned some country-specific practices, but we also observed variations within the responding official veterinarians that could not be explained by country of origin or years of work experience. Additional detailed studies on the variation are needed before harmonisation of meat inspection procedures are attempted.

The overall objectives of meat inspection are to contribute to food safety, animal welfare, and animal health. In the European Union (EU), there is a request for a modernised meat inspection system that addresses these objectives in a more valid, feasible and cost-effective way than does the traditional system. One part of the modernisation deals with the coding system to register meat inspection findings. Although unified standards are set at the EU level for judgement criteria regarding fitness of meat for consumption, different national systems are in force. The question is the extent of the differences and whether there is a basis for harmonisation. To investigate this, information was gathered about the code systems in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal and Spain. Moreover, meat inspection data covering pigs slaughtered in 2019 were collected. A comparison of the number of codes available, the terminology and the frequencies of the findings registered was undertaken. Codes with a similar meaning were grouped. Hereby, two lists were compiled showing the most common codes leading to total and to partial condemnation. Substantial variations in the percentage of condemned pigs and in the terms used were identified, and possible reasons behind this are discussed. Moreover, a strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT)-like analysis was applied to the coding systems. Finally, the reasons for unfitness of meat given in the EU Food Inspection Regulation 2019/627 were compared to the national code lists. The results show the systems in force varied substantially, and each system had its advantages and disadvantages. The diverse terminology observed made it a challenge to compare data between countries. Development of harmonised terminology for meat inspection findings is suggested, enabling comparison of data between abattoirs, regions, and countries, while respecting the national epidemiological situation, the local food safety culture, and the trade agreements in force.

The overall objectives of meat inspection are to contribute to food safety, animal welfare, and animal health. In the European Union (EU), there is a request for a modernised meat inspection system that addresses these objectives in a more valid, feasible and cost-effective way than does the traditional system. One part of the modernisation deals with the coding system to register meat inspection findings. Although unified standards are set at the EU level for judgement criteria regarding fitness of meat for consumption, different national systems are in force. The question is the extent of the differences and whether there is a basis for harmonisation. To investigate this, information was gathered about the code systems in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal and Spain. Moreover, meat inspection data covering pigs slaughtered in 2019 were collected. A comparison of the number of codes available, the terminology and the frequencies of the findings registered was undertaken. Codes with a similar meaning were grouped. Hereby, two lists were compiled showing the most common codes leading to total and to partial condemnation. Substantial variations in the percentage of condemned pigs and in the terms used were identified, and possible reasons behind this are discussed. Moreover, a strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT)-like analysis was applied to the coding systems. Finally, the reasons for unfitness of meat given in the EU Food Inspection Regulation 2019/627 were compared to the national code lists. The results show the systems in force varied substantially, and each system had its advantages and disadvantages. The diverse terminology observed made it a challenge to compare data between countries. Development of harmonised terminology for meat inspection findings is suggested, enabling comparison of data between abattoirs, regions, and countries, while respecting the national epidemiological situation, the local food safety culture, and the trade agreements in force.