Global Veterinary Intelligence
Reader login
Veterinary33

Free reader access

Every article remains open. Registration is for participation, not access.

Create a profile to comment, join discussions, receive more relevant recommendations, keep your activity connected, and access selected opportunities.

Article · Clinical Study · 2 min read

Sample-level PRRSV RT-PCR prevalence in pigs in mainland China (2004-2025) A systematic review and meta-analysis.

22 views

Clinical evidence update from Preventive veterinary medicine

August 24, 2026 at 12:00 PM UTCPreventive veterinary medicineVeterinary33 Editorial Desk

Comments on this article are also part of the Veterinary33 clinical forum.

Sample-level PRRSV RT-PCR prevalence in pigs in mainland China (2004-2025) A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Clinical Context

Peer-reviewed veterinary literature continues to shape everyday decision-making for production animal practice, especially when new evidence clarifies diagnosis, treatment selection, monitoring, or clinical outcomes.

What the Study Evaluated

A study published in Preventive veterinary medicine in 2026 evaluated sample-level PRRSV RT-PCR prevalence in pigs in mainland China (2004-2025): A systematic review and meta-analysis..

Key Findings

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus is associated with substantial costs for the global pig industry. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 71 cross-sectional surveys (307,863 pig specimens from 27 provinces, 2004-2025) to quantify long-term spatiotemporal trends and associated factors of sample-level PRRSV RT-PCR positivity in mainland China. The overall pooled PRRSV RT-PCR positivity was 32% (95% CI: 29-34%) with high between-study heterogeneity (I² = 99%, P < 0.001); this estimate summarizes diverse study populations and does not represent uniform national prevalence. Pooled prevalence declined from 36%...

Why It Matters for Veterinary Professionals

For veterinary professionals, the practical value of this work lies in how the findings may support more structured clinical assessment, clearer monitoring, and more informed decisions for production animal practice.

Practical Interpretation

The results should be interpreted in the context of the study design, population, inclusion criteria, and clinical setting. Application in practice should consider patient-specific risk factors, available diagnostics, local standards of care, and clinician judgment.

Clinical Takeaway

Overall, the study adds useful evidence for clinicians seeking to align daily practice with current veterinary research while maintaining a balanced, case-by-case approach.

Read the full article here.

Discussion thread

Community replies

0 replies

No replies yet

No replies yet. Be the first professional to join this discussion.

Join this discussion

Add your reply

Share a professional insight, ask a focused question, or add relevant clinical experience.

Member participation

Log in to join the discussion

Share an answer, ask a question, reply to another professional, or mark useful contributions as helpful.

Log in to reply

Continue the conversation

Share this article with another veterinary professional.

LinkedInEmail
Articles remain free

Create a profile when you are ready to participate.

Veterinary33 does not require registration to read its articles. A free reader profile connects your discussions, recommendations, professional details, and reader activity.

After registration or login, you will return to this exact article.

Registered readers may also receive selected educational and community opportunities.

Join discussions

Comment on articles and participate in professional conversations.

Relevant recommendations

Use your reading and engagement activity to surface more useful articles.

Connected reader activity

Return to your likes, comments, discussions, and article activity in one place.

Professional profile

Add your profession, specialty, workplace, biography, and profile image.

Registration is optional

Continue reading