Next Article in Journal
‘Can They Take the Heat?’—The Egyptian Climate and Its Effects on Livestock
Previous Article in Journal
Harbour Porpoise Abundance in Portugal over a 5-Year Period and Estimates of Potential Distribution
Previous Article in Special Issue
Causes of Sow Mortality and Risks to Post-Mortem Findings in a Brazilian Intensive Swine Production System
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 12
Issue 15
10.3390/ani12151936
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Used to Define the Optimum Needle Length in Pigs of Different Ages

by
Maren Bernau
1,2,*,
Ulrike Gerster
1 and
Armin Manfred Scholz
1
1
Livestock Center Oberschleissheim, Veterinary Faculty of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, St. Hubertusstrasse 12, 85764 Oberschleissheim, Germany
2
Fakultät Agrarwirtschaft, Volkswirtschaft und Management, Hochschule für Wirtschaft und Umwelt Nürtingen-Geislingen, Neckarsteige 6-10, 72622 Nürtingen, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2022, 12(15), 1936; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151936
Submission received: 29 June 2022 / Revised: 26 July 2022 / Accepted: 27 July 2022 / Published: 29 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Porcine Herd Health Management)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Injections always cause local reactions. To minimize these, the optimum injection site as well as the optimum injection depth should be considered. A total of 730 magnetic resonance images of pig necks were evaluated to determine the depth from the skin to the presumed optimum injection site in the muscle, and the depth to the spine at two sites at the base of the ear. Further studies are needed to determine the optimum needle length for different age groups and injection volumes.

Abstract

Intramuscular injections result in tissue destruction and alteration. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the optimum injection point for intramuscular injections. As animals—especially pigs—vary in size and explicit information about injection depth is not available. To determine the predicted optimum injection depth, magnetic resonance imaging was used in pigs of different ages and weight groups. In total, 730 magnetic resonance images of 136 pigs were used to calculate the optimum injection depth for intramuscular injections. Four age groups were evaluated: <29 days of age, 29–70 days of age, 71–117 days of age and >170 days of age. For fattening pigs (71–117 days of age), the present study recommends a needle length of 20 mm (range: 40–58 mm). For younger pigs (<70 days of age), a needle length of 12 to 14 mm (range: 10–18 mm), and for older pigs (>170 days of age), a needle length of 30 mm (range: 25–37 mm) is recommended. However, more data are needed. Therefore, further studies are necessary, especially in the youngest (suckling pigs) and oldest (sows) age groups, as these are the groups mainly injected/vaccinated. Additionally, age and weight should be examined in more detail compared to fat distribution in the neck, genetics and the sex of the animal.

1. Introduction

Each intramuscular injection results in tissue alteration and tissue destruction [1,2,3,4], which very likely results in pain. Tissue alterations based on drug application are described for different formulations and different animal categories [5,6,7]. In contrast to laboratory animals [8,9,10], explicit information on injection type, volume and needle size is missing for farm animals.
Information describing the optimum injection site might lead to less pain and improve efficiency of drug effects in farm animals. Several articles have compared injection types and sites in pigs, i.e., [11,12]. For injecting pigs intramuscularly, the neck tissue behind the base of the ear has been determined to be a suitable injection site [11]. Houpert et al. [11] showed that the muscles in the neck region are smaller and surrounded by loose conjunctive tissue, which reduces the spread of injective material compared with the loin or gluteal region. Song et al. [12] did not find any differences in the intramuscular injection type (neck or thigh area) in piglets with respect to the pharmacokinetic properties. However, repeated injections were not examined in this study [12]. In books for porcine medicine the neck area behind the base of the ear is recommended as the best injection site for intramuscular injections [13,14]. Baumgartner [15] recommended one finger wide, caudal from the base of the ear, as the injection site of choice for pigs weighing over 10 kg (for piglets he recommended the neck tissue).
Aside from the injection site, needle length and needle diameter play an important role in both drug delivery and associated pain. It is well known that thinner and shorter needles cause less irritation [16,17]. Human studies have shown a close correlation between injection pain and needle thickness: smaller diameters of needle results in less pain at insertion [17,18,19].
Reiner [14] described the optimum needle length for piglets as 12 to 20 mm, for fattening pigs as 40 mm and sows as 75 mm; a weight range is not described. Houpert et al. [11] concluded that the weight of the animals does not influence the location of the deposit, but they only used a 2 mL volume and therefore qualified their statement, stating that their results might change if larger volumes were used. Additionally, Houpert et al. [11] did not detect an effect of the needle length (30 mm vs. 40 mm). Thomsen et al. [20] found differences in tissue deposition depending on needle length (5 mm vs. 8 mm) using subcutaneous injections in pigs.
The optimum needle length varies depending on the injection site, age and/or weight of the pig, and the injection volume. Therefore, needle length is an important parameter to guarantee the least harmful injection for each animal size, to avoid painful injuries due to wrong drug application such as intraneural or periosteal injections. The aim of this study was to evaluate magnetic resonance images of porcine neck tissue to generate helpful information for predicting the optimum/suitable injection depth for intramuscular injection in pigs of different age and weight groups, injected into the recommended injection site. This study is entirely anatomical in nature and did not involve measurements of needle tip locations nor evaluate parameters that impact the distribution efficiency of injected material in pigs.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animals and Management

For this study, 730 magnetic resonance images of 136 pigs were used for the calculations. Observations were divided into the four different age groups (see Table 1). Pigs were purebred German Landrace (26% of the animals) or hybrids of Pietrain sires and German Landrace sows (74% of the animals). Male (not castrated; 54% of the animals) and female pigs (46% of the animals) were included (age group >171 days only for female animals).
These images were collected in two experimental studies, both conducted in accordance with the District Government of Upper Bavaria (registration numbers: 55.2-1-54-2532-138-11 and 55.2-1-54-2532-196-2014) and in compliance with local and national guidelines [21,22,23].

2.2. Magnetic Resonance Imaging

An open low-field MRI system (Siemens Magnetom Open; 0.2 Tesla magnetic field strength) was used to image the neck region of the pigs. All pigs were anaesthetized for MR scanning to avoid movements and to guarantee an excellent image quality. Anesthesia was performed by a combination of azaperone (2 mg per kg body weight) and ketamine (10–15 mg per kg body weight) given intramuscularly [24] into the hind leg muscles to avoid any tissue changes in the neck region. The neck region of all animals was scanned via MRI using a coronary T1-weighted sequence to maximize contrast between soft tissues. The corresponding sequence parameters are shown in Table 2, divided for the different age groups. All pigs were bedded in a prone position with front limbs flexed and hind limbs extended, to guarantee good bedding for optimal image quality. The procedure was performed up to seven times in a weekly interval for a single animal. In total 730 magnetic resonance images were collected from 136 pigs.

2.3. Image Evaluation

The T1-weighted magnetic resonance images were used to evaluate the presumed optimum injection depth. Synedra View Personal® software (Synedra IT GmbH, AIM 16 “Hermes”) was used to define the coronary magnetic resonance image at the ear-base level (see Figure 1a). After defining the coronary image at the ear-base level, this image was used to measure the optimum injection depth (OI). For intramuscular injection, the Musculus biventer cervicis is recommended [25]; therefore, OI was defined as a point in the middle of the Musculus biventer cervicis. For distance measurements the Sante Dicom Editor® (Santesoft, Version 3.3.4) was used.
Two “injection sites” were evaluated: first, 10.55 mm behind the base of the ear (see Figure 1b) and, second, 20.39 mm behind the base of the ear (see Figure 1e). Both length measurements (10.55 mm and 20.39 mm distance) were pre-installed lengths in the software. These pre-installed lengths were chosen in order to select the same distance and, thus, to match the recommended injection site one finger wide, caudal to the base of the ear [15]. At both injection sites, the optimum injection depth (OI; see Figure 1c,f) and the distance to the middle of the neck (MN; see Figure 1d,g) were measured. MN was measured as the length from the skin to the middle of the neck of a pig (clearly detectable in the magnetic resonance image) in order to evaluate the whole neck depth (including the half of the vertebral body). A total of 730 magnetic resonance images were evaluated and grouped according to the age of the animals.

2.4. Statistical Evaluation

Mean distance values and standard deviation values for the four defined age groups (<29 days, 29–70 days, 71–117 days and >170 days) were calculated using Excel software. Additionally, a stepwise regression analysis was performed using the proc reg function of SAS software (version 9.3, SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Age and weight were included as potential regression variables. The significance level for entry and stay in the model was set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

The mean values are displayed in Table 3, divided into the four age groups and the four variables: MN_1, OI_1, MN_2, OI_2. The age group < 29 days and the age group 29–70 days received similar results regarding the optimum injection depth (OI) and length to the middle of the neck (MN). For the age group < 29 days (suckling pigs), the OI received a depth of around 12 mm (10–15 mm); for the age group 29–70 days the OI was measured in a depth of around 14 mm (10–18 mm). The length to the middle of the neck (MN) is 36/37 mm (30–40 mm) for both measurement points and for both age groups. For the group 71–117 days of age, the OI received a depth of 20 mm (15–25 mm), and for MN, a length of 45–60 mm was measured. For the oldest group (>170 days), OI was measured in a depth of around 30 mm (25–36 mm) under the skin surface at both measurement points, whilst MN was measured with a length of 75 mm (70–80 mm) (Table 3).
Similar results for the OI and MN were obtained, even if measurements were separated regarding the sexes (see Table S1—Supplementary Materials).
Table 4 demonstrates the results of the stepwise regression analysis including all animals, not separated into age groups. The calculated coefficient of determination was higher for the MN measurement (R2 = 0.91–0.92) at both measurement points, as was the case for the OI measurement (R2 = 0.71–0.59). Age and weight are included in the regression equations. Additionally, Figure S1 (Supplementary Materials) visualizes these results in a multiple regression.
Table 5 shows the results of the stepwise analysis divided into the four age groups. For the oldest age group (>170 days), at both measurement points, no variable entered the regression equation. Additionally, no significantly contributing variables could be found for the youngest age group (<29 days) regarding OI_2.
It can be stated that, for OI_1, weight had more influence in finding the optimum injection depth when the animals are younger. This can be supported by Table S1. For OI_2, regarding the age group 71–117 days of age, an age effect could be detected.

4. Discussion

Some studies exist describing the importance of injection sites and needle length in pigs, i.e., [11,12]. Human and animal research [16,17,18,19,26,27] have shown that the optimum injection depth results in less pain and being transferred to animals might result in higher animal welfare. This is of great importance, even if irritating inoculums or vaccines are used, which can result in large-scale tissue alterations [1,2,5,6,7,25].
1. Optimum needle length: The present study calculated the optimum needle length by measuring the distance from the skin to (a) the defined optimum intramuscular injection point (OI) and to (b) the middle of the neck (MN). The Musculus biventer cervicis is recommended for intramuscular injection [25], injecting the needle one finger width caudal behind the base of the ear [15]. This can be confirmed by the performed MRI measurements.
Based on the presented results (Table 3), a needle length of 10–18 mm is recommended for piglets < 71 days of age. Therefore, the present study confirms the statement of Reiner [14], with a slightly different range. It has to be considered that most of the measurements (n = 307) were taken for age group 29–70 days of age with a mean weight of 13.0 ± 4.1 kg (range 6.0 to 31.5 kg). Therefore, further studies are needed in younger piglets (suckling pigs) to evaluate the optimum needle length and injection volume due to smaller muscles and body sizes. For fattening pigs (71–117 days of age), the present study recommends a needle length of 20 mm (range: 15–25 mm; Table 3). This is in contrast to the recommendation of Reiner [14], who recommended 40 mm. As no age or weight range is given by Reiner [14], there might be some uncertainty. The present measurements showed that the length to the middle of the neck is 45–60 mm (Table 3) in the age group 71–117 days, with a mean weight of 33.0 ± 7.9 kg (weight range from 12.5 to 54.5 kg). Therefore, a needle length of 40 mm might result in a deep intramuscular injection or maybe in a periosteal or intraneural injection, which results in painful tissue alteration or functional nerve injury [28]. The age group of > 170 days resulted in an optimum needle length of 30 mm (range: 25–37 mm), with a 70–80 mm length to the middle of the neck. This group had a mean weight of 87.9 ± 11.7 kg, which might be similar to the fattening group in the publication of Reiner [14]. Adult pigs, sows or boars, were not included in this study. This is due to the size of the tube or the diameter of the gantry using the three-dimensional imaging tool available, which limits the size of the animal that can be examined [29].
It has to be taken into account that length to the middle of the neck (MN) does not represent the length from the skin to a vertebral body. Therefore, further studies are needed, to detect the length from the skin at the optimum injection site to the vertebral body, in order to determine the best needle length that avoids painful periosteal or intraneural injections [28]. As shown in this study, MRI seems to be an appropriate tool to calculate the optimum injection depth and, with this, needle length, in pigs with respect to their body size, as it is able to visualize muscle tissue and body contours in a non-invasive way [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37].
2. Weight as a factor for optimum needle length: The fact that weight plays an important role for optimum injection [1,11] can be inferred from the present results, as shown in the stepwise regression (Table 5) where weight is always (except for OI_2) an independent variable, with a higher impact in younger animals. As weight plays an important role, further studies are needed to evaluate the impact on needle length in more detail. Beside this, sex and sex-specific growth patterns, and fat distribution patterns should be studied, as well as genetic effects. Sex influences total body fat and subcutaneous adipose tissue [32,36,37], which might influence the optimum injection point and the optimum needle length. The present study did not find differences in sex or genetics (Table S1), but it only examined 136 animals in four age groups that were mainly Pietrain hybrids (74%).
Additionally, the volume of injectable solutions may influence the location and the local reaction [1,2,5,25]. Therefore, muscle growth should be taken into account as well. In pigs > 29 days of age, OI_2 is smaller than OI_1 (Table 3). This might be explained by anatomic orientation of the muscle and muscle growth, as this seems to be different in pigs under 29 days of age. Due to the small number of animals < 29 days of age used in this study compared to the other groups, this should not be overestimated.
3. Measurement method: Measurement point 1 (_1; Figure 1b) was defined as 10.55 mm behind the ear base and measurement point 2 (_2) was defined as 20.39 mm behind the ear. As the optimum injection point in pigs is defined as “behind the base of the ear” [13,14] or “one finger wide caudal behind the base of the ear” [15], the Sante Software fixed measurement length was used to ensure the same distance to the ear base for all measured images. Additionally, the measured points should be useful in praxis as well. With the chosen fixed measurements, this transfer is around one finger width (_1) or two finger widths (or one rather wide finger (_2)) behind the base of the ear.
The MRI method worked well for the chosen age groups and the chosen MRI sequences were a good compromise between the time of acquisition and image resolution. Therefore, the method and sequence can be recommended for further examinations. Additionally, the positioning of the animal can be recommended for further studies in this context because lying in prone position does not compress neck tissue and flexed front limbs stretch the neck; this is more natural than having extended front limbs, which might compress the lower neck tissue.
4. Further studies needed: Using three-dimensional imaging devices, such as MRI, can help to predict the optimum needle length and, furthermore, help to evaluate the optimum needle thickness. This study confirms the possibility of three-dimensional imaging and the usefulness of analyzing images in different research activities. For upcoming questions, MRI can be used as a method receiving close relationships with pathomorphological data [1,2,38]. Muscle growth can also be detected using MRI [29,32,36] and should be analyzed in further studies with respect to sex, weight and genetics.

5. Conclusions

The aim of this study was to use magnetic resonance images to determine the optimum needle length for use in pigs of different age groups, to give recommendations for practitioners and, with this, to help achieve effective but minimally painful injections. The results showed that MRI can be used to calculate the optimum injection depth (= optimum needle length) in various age groups. Compared with previous studies, the present results confirm an optimum needle length of 10–18 mm (Reiner [14]: 12–20 mm) for piglets <70 days of age. For older pigs, a 20 mm needle length (age group: 71–117 days of age) and a 30 mm needle length (age group >170 days of age) were calculated. However, further studies in defined age and weight groups are necessary, especially in the youngest (<29 days of age; suckling pigs) and the oldest (>170 days of age; sows) age groups, as these are the groups mainly vaccinated/injected on farms. Additionally, the impact of injection volume and needle size should be evaluated as well. Finally, the injection site should be standardized for measurements. Measurements post-injection can help identify the optimum injection depth in various animal sizes and injection volumes.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ani12151936/s1, Figure S1: Multiple regressions showing the accuracy of using age [d] and weight [kg] to estimate the depth of the optimum injection site 10.55 mm (OI_1; Figure S1a) and 20.39 mm (OI_2; Figure S1b) behind the base of the ear. Multiple regression showing the accuracy of using age [d] and weight [kg] to estimate the depth to the spine 10.55 mm (spine_1; Figure S1c) and 20.39 mm (spine_2; Figure S1d) behind the base of the ear. Table S1: Mean values including standard deviations for the optimum injection point (OI) and the length to the middle of the neck (MN) at first (_1) and second (_2) measurement point, divided into the four defined age groups and separated to sex with mean age and weight.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.B.; methodology, M.B. and U.G.; formal analysis, M.B. and A.M.S.; investigation, M.B. and U.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.B.; writing—review and editing, M.B., U.G. and A.M.S.; visualization, M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received financial support from the LMU Women’s Office as part of LMU Mentoring and supported by the LMU Diversity Management Support.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The animal study protocol was approved by the District Government of Upper Bavaria (registration numbers: 55.2-1-54-2532-138-11 and 55.2-1-54-2532-196-2014) and was in compliance with local and national guidelines.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bernau, M.; Kremer, P.V.; Kreuzer, L.S.; Emrich, D.; Pappenberger, E.; Cussler, K.; Hoffmann, A.; Leipig, M.; Hermanns, W.; Scholz, A.M. Assessment of Local Reaction to Vaccines in Live Piglets with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared to Histopathology. ALTEX-Altern. Anim. Exp. 2016, 33, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Bernau, M.; Große Liesner, B.; Schwanitz, S.; Kraus, A.-S.; Falkenau, A.; Leipig-Rudolph, M.; Hermanns, W.; Scholz, A.M. Vaccine safety testing using magnetic resonance imaging in suckling pigs. Vaccine 2018, 36, 1789–1795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Diness, V. Local Tissue Damage after Intramuscular Injections in Rabbits and Pigs: Quantitation by Determination of Creatine Kinase Activity at Injection Sites. Acta Pharmacol. Toxicol. 1985, 56, 410–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rasmussen, F.; Svendsen, O. Tissue damage and concentration at the injection site after intramuscular injection of chemotherapeutics and vehicles in pigs. Res. Vet. Sci. 1976, 20, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bernau, M.; Schwanitz, S.; Kreuzer, L.S.; Scholz, A.M. Detection of local tissue reactions after anti-GnRF injection in male pigs assessed using magnetic resonance imaging. Animals 2021, 11, 968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ohnesorge, B.; Pfalzgraf, S.; Rohn, K.; Neuhaus, J.; Deegen, E. Unverträglichkeitsreaktionen nach intramuskulärer Injektion beim Pferd–Auswertung einer Tierärztebefragung. Pferdeheilkunde 2006, 22, 337–346. [Google Scholar]
  7. Pyörälä, S.; Laurila, T.; Lehtonen, S.; Leppä, S.; Kaartinen, L. Local Tissue Damage in Cows after Intramuscular Administration of Preparations Containing Phenylbutazone, Flunixin, Ketoprofen and Metamizole. Acta Vet. Scand. 1999, 40, 145–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Diehl, K.-H.; Hull, R.; Morton, D.; Pfister, R.; Rabemampianina, Y.; Smith, D.; Vidal, J.-M.; van de Vorstenbosch, C. A Good Practice Guide to the Administration of Substances and Removal of Blood, Including Routes and Volumes. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2001, 21, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dülsner, A.; Hack, R.; Krüger, C.; Pils, M.; Scherer, K.; Schmelting, B.; Schmidt, M.; Weinert, H.; Jourdan, T. Empfehlung zur Substanzapplikation bei Versuchstieren. In Fachinformation aus dem Ausschuss für Tierschutzbeauftragte und dem Arbeitskreis 4 in der TVT; GV-SOLAS und Tierärztliche Vereinigung für Tierschutz e.V. 2017; German Veterinary Association for Animal Welfare: Munich, Germany, 2017; Available online: https://www.gv-solas.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2017Fachinformation_Injektionsvolumina.pdf (accessed on 26 July 2022).
  10. Morton, D.B.; Jennings, M.; Buckwell, A.; Ewbank, R.; Godfrey, C.; Holgate, B.; Inglis, I.; James, R.; Page, C.; Sharman, I.; et al. Refining procedures for the administration of substances. Lab. Anim. 2001, 35, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Houpert, P.; Combrisson, H.; Nain, S.; Autefage, A.; Toutain, P.L. Intra- vs. intermuscular injections in swine. Vet. Res. 1992, 24, 278–285. [Google Scholar]
  12. Song, I.B.; Kim, T.W.; Lee, H.G.; Kim, M.S.; Hwang, Y.H.; Park, B.K.; Lim, J.H.; Yun, H.I. Influence of the Injection Site on the Pharmacokinetics of Cefquinome Following Intramuscular Injection in Piglets. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2013, 75, 89–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Heinritzi, K. Applikationstechniken. In Schweinekrankheiten; Heinritzi, K., Gindele, H.R., Reiner, G., Schnurrbusch, U., Eds.; Ulmer Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany, 2006; ISBN 978-3-8252-8325-4. [Google Scholar]
  14. Reiner, G. Krankes Schwein–Kranker Bestand; Ulmer Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany, 2015; ISBN 978-3-8252-8646-0. [Google Scholar]
  15. Baumgartner, W. Klinische Propädeutik der Inneren Krankheiten und Hautkrankheiten der Haus- und Heimtiere; Verlag Paul Parey: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; ISBN 3-8263-3472-2. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hill, R.L.; Wilmot, J.G.; Belluscio, B.A.; Cleary, K.; Lindisch, D.; Tucker, R.; Wilson, E.; Shukla, R.B. Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh. Med. Devices Evid. Res. 2016, 9, 257–266. [Google Scholar]
  17. Juul, K.A.P.; Bengtsson, H.; Eyving, B.; Kildegaard, J.; Lav, S.; Poulsen, M.; Serup, J.; Stallknecht, B. Influence of hypodermic needle dimensions on subcutaneous injection delivery—A pig study of injection deposition evaluated by CT scanning, histology, and backflow. Ski. Res. Technol. 2012, 18, 447–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Arendt-Nielsen, L.; Egekvist, H.; Bjerring, P. Pain following controlled cutaneous insertion of needles with different diameters. Somatosens. Mot. Res. 2006, 23, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McKay, M.; Compion, G.; Lytzen, L. A comparison of insulin injection needles on patients’ perceptions of pain, handling, and acceptability: A randomized, open-label, crossover study in subjects with diabetes. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 2009, 11, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Thomsen, M.; Rasmussen, C.H.; Refsgaard, H.H.F.; Pedersen, K.-M.; Kirk, R.K.; Poulsen, M.; Feidenhans’l, R. Spatial distribution of soluble insulin in pig subcutaneous tissue: Effect of needle length, injection speed and injected volume. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 79, 96–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the Protection of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:276:0033:0079:en:PDF (accessed on 26 July 2022).
  22. Tierschutzgesetz 2021. Tierschutzgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 18. Mai 2006 (BGBl. I S. 1206, 1313), Das Zuletzt Durch Artikel 105 des Gesetzes vom 10. August 2021 (BGBl. I S. 3436) Geändert Worden ist (Animal Protection Law). Available online: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tierschg/BJNR012770972.html (accessed on 26 July 2022).
  23. Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungsverordnung 2021. Verordnung zum Schutz Landwirtschaftlicher Nutztiere und Anderer zur Erzeugung Tierischer Produkte Gehaltener Tier bei Ihrer Haltung. Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungsverordnung in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 22. August 2006 (BGBl. I S. 2043), die Zuletzt durch Artikel 1a der Verordnung vom 29. January 2021 (BGBl. I S. 146) Geändert Worden ist. (German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection). Available online: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tierschnutztv/BJNR275800001.html (accessed on 26 July 2022).
  24. Arzneimittelgesetz 2022. Arzneimittelgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 12. Dezember 2005 (BGBl. I S. 3394), das Zuletzt Durch Artikel 14 G vom 24.06.2022 (BGBl. I S. 959) Geändert Worden ist. (Medicinal Products Act). Available online: https://www.buzer.de/AMG.htm (accessed on 26 July 2022).
  25. Elicker, S. Untersuchungen zur Festlegung Tierschutzkonformer Injektionsvolumina bei Schweinen. Ph.D. Thesis, LMU München: Tierärztliche Fakultät, Munich, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wu, J.; Cai, Y.; Cao, A.; Bi, Y.; Hu, X.; Yang, S. Recommendation of the best site based on the distribution pattern of extramuscular and intramuscular nerves for gluteal muscle injection. Int. J. Morphol. 2020, 38, 975–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nakajima, Y.; Fujii, T.; Mukai, K.; Ishida, A.; Kato, M.; Takahashi, M.; Tsuda, M.; Hashiba, N.; Mori, N.; Yamanaka, A.; et al. Anatomically safe sites for intramuscular injections: A cross-sectional study on young adults and cadavers with a focus on the thigh. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2020, 16, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kirchmair, L.; Ströhle, M.; Löscher, W.N.; Kreutziger, J.; Voelckel, W.G.; Lirk, P. Neurophysiological effects of needle trauma and intraneural injection in a porcine model: A pilot study. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 2016, 60, 393–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Scholz, A.M.; Bünger, L.; Kongsro, J.; Baulain, U.; Mitchell, A.D. Non-invasive methods for the detection of body and carcass composition in livestock: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound: Invited review. Animal 2015, 9, 1250–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Baulain, U. Magnetic resonance imaging for the in vivo determination of body composition in animal science. Comput. Electron. Agric. 1997, 17, 189–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Baulain, U.; Henning, M. Untersuchungen zur Schlachtkörper- und Fleischqualität mit Hilfe von MR-Tomographie und MR-Spektroskopie. Arch. Anim. Breed. 2011, 44, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bernau, M.; Kremer, P.V.; Scholz, A.M. Vergleich der Körperzusammensetzung von Schweinen bei 80 kg und 100 kg Lebendmasse mittels Magnetresonanztomographie. Züchtungskunde 2013, 85, 430–439. [Google Scholar]
  33. Bernau, M.; Kremer, P.V.; Lauterbach, E.; Tholen, E.; Petersen, B.; Pappenberger, E.; Scholz, A.M. Evaluation of carcass composition of intact boars by using linear measurements from performance testing, dissection, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Meat Sci. 2015, 104, 58–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kušec, G.; Scholz, A.M.; Baulain, U.; Djurkin Kušec, I.; Bernau, M. Non-invasive techniques for exact phenotypic assessment of carcass composition and tissue growth in domestic animals. Acta Argric. Slov. Suppl. 2016, 5, 12–17. [Google Scholar]
  35. Scholz, A.M.; Mitchell, A.D.; Wang, P.C.; Song, H.; Yan, Z. Muscle metabolism and body composition of pigs with different ryanodine receptor genotypes studied by means of 31P nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and 1H magnetic resonance imaging. Arch. Für Tierz. 1995, 38, 539–552. [Google Scholar]
  36. Schwanitz, S.; Bernau, M.; Kreuzer, L.S.; Kremer-Rücker, P.V.; Scholz, A.M. Körperzusammensetzung und Ebergeruch bei intakten Ebern, immunologisch und chirurgisch kastrierten Schweinen. Züchtungskunde 2017, 89, 413–433. [Google Scholar]
  37. Weigand, A.C.; Schweizer, H.; Knob, D.A.; Scholz, A.M. Phenotyping of the Visceral Adipose Tissue Using Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in Pigs. Animals 2020, 10, 1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Reimers, C.D. Kapitel 8 Vergleich der bildgebenden Verfahren. In Atlas der Muskelkrankheiten; Pongratz, D.E., Reimers, C.D., Hahn, D., Nägele, M., Müller-Felber, W., Eds.; Urban & Schwarzenberger: Munich, Germany; Vienna, Austria; Baltimore, MD, USA, 1990; ISBN 3-541-13021-0. [Google Scholar]
Animals 12 01936 g001 550
Figure 1. Demonstration of the measurements performed at the ear-base level. (a) Definition of the coronary image at the ear-base level (pig 1668; 23.5 kg, 94 days of age). (b) Defining the first injection point (OI_1), 10.55 mm behind the base of the ear. (c) Measuring the optimum injection point at 10.55 mm distance (OI_1) from the base of the ear (here: 19.77 mm). (d) Measuring the distance to the middle of the neck at 10.55 mm distance (MN_1) from the base of the ear (here: 44.03 mm). (e) Defining the second injection point (OI_2), 20.39 mm behind the base of the ear. (f) Measuring the optimum injection point at 20.39 mm distance (OI_2) from the base of the ear (here: 22.46 mm). (g) Measuring the distance to the middle of the neck at 20.39 mm distance (MN_2) from the base of the ear (here: 45.82 mm).
Figure 1. Demonstration of the measurements performed at the ear-base level. (a) Definition of the coronary image at the ear-base level (pig 1668; 23.5 kg, 94 days of age). (b) Defining the first injection point (OI_1), 10.55 mm behind the base of the ear. (c) Measuring the optimum injection point at 10.55 mm distance (OI_1) from the base of the ear (here: 19.77 mm). (d) Measuring the distance to the middle of the neck at 10.55 mm distance (MN_1) from the base of the ear (here: 44.03 mm). (e) Defining the second injection point (OI_2), 20.39 mm behind the base of the ear. (f) Measuring the optimum injection point at 20.39 mm distance (OI_2) from the base of the ear (here: 22.46 mm). (g) Measuring the distance to the middle of the neck at 20.39 mm distance (MN_2) from the base of the ear (here: 45.82 mm).
Animals 12 01936 g001
Table
Table 1. Information regarding the different age and weight groups in detail.
Table 1. Information regarding the different age and weight groups in detail.
Age Group [d]Number of ObservationsMean Age
[d]		Age Range
from–to [d]		Mean Weight [kg]Weight Range
from–to [kg]
<296221.6 ± 5.95–267.0 ± 2.03.5–11.5
29–7030750.3 ± 11.131–7013.0 ± 4.16.0–31.5
71–11721994.2 ± 12.671–11733.0 ± 7.912.5–54.5
>170142179.3 ± 7.1171–19587.9 ± 11.758–124
Table
Table 2. MRI imaging parameter.
Table 2. MRI imaging parameter.
MRI ParameterAge Group
Suckling Pigs
<29 Days of Age		Weaned Pigs
29–70 Days of Age		Fattening Pigs
>71 Days of Age
TR [msec]814814814
TE [msec]171717
Pixel size1.30 × 0.701.67 × 0.902.54 × 1.37
FOV [mm]180230350
Matrix138 × 256 (54%)138 × 256 (54%)138 × 256 (54%)
Number of slices222222
Slice thickness [mm]445
Distance factor0.50.51.00
Examination time5 min 40 s5 min 40 s5 min 40 s
Table
Table 3. Mean values including standard deviations for the optimum injection point (OI) and the length to the middle of the neck (MN) at first (_1) and second (_2) measurement point for each of the four defined age groups.
Table 3. Mean values including standard deviations for the optimum injection point (OI) and the length to the middle of the neck (MN) at first (_1) and second (_2) measurement point for each of the four defined age groups.
Age Group [d]nMN_1 [mm]
Mean ± SD		OI_1 [mm]
Mean ± SD		MN_2 [mm]
Mean ± SD		OI_2 [mm]
Mean ± SD
<296236.3 ± 4.512.5 ± 3.437.7 ± 4.513.7 ± 2.7
29–7030736.9 ± 4.714.7 ± 3.637.7 ± 4.414.2 ± 3.2
71–11721951.9 ± 6.522.2 ± 4.453.7 ± 6.720.9 ± 5.2
>17014274.3 ± 5.330.9 ± 5.477.6 ± 4.929.2 ± 7.3
Table
Table 4. Results of the stepwise regression analysis for all observations.
Table 4. Results of the stepwise regression analysis for all observations.
Dependent VariableInterceptSlopeIndependent VariableR2RMSE [mm]
OI_110.0089+0.0932
+0.0569		age [d]
weight [kg]		0.714.14
MN_129.3863+0.1014
+0.3173		age [d]
weight [kg]		0.914.58
OI_210.3903+0.0774
+0.0611		age [d]
weight [kg]		0.594.82
MN_230.0477+0.1007
+0.3483		age [d]
weight [kg]		0.924.57
Table
Table 5. Results of the stepwise regression analysis divided into the four age groups and separated to measurement points 1 and 2.
Table 5. Results of the stepwise regression analysis divided into the four age groups and separated to measurement points 1 and 2.
Dependent VariableAge Group [d]nInterceptSlopeIndependent VariableR2RMSE [mm]
OI_1<29627.23607+0.75155weight [kg]0.203.05
OI_129–703079.24606+0.41847weight [kg]0.233.21
OI_171–11721913.93949+0.25050weight [kg]0.203.96
OI_1>170142-
OI_2<2962-
OI_229–7030712.04712+0.16433weight [kg]0.053.13
OI_271–1172196.94691+0.14840age [d]0.134.82
OI_2>170142-
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bernau, M.; Gerster, U.; Scholz, A.M. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Used to Define the Optimum Needle Length in Pigs of Different Ages. Animals 2022, 12, 1936. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151936

AMA Style

Bernau M, Gerster U, Scholz AM. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Used to Define the Optimum Needle Length in Pigs of Different Ages. Animals. 2022; 12(15):1936. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151936

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bernau, Maren, Ulrike Gerster, and Armin Manfred Scholz. 2022. "Magnetic Resonance Imaging Used to Define the Optimum Needle Length in Pigs of Different Ages" Animals 12, no. 15: 1936. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151936

APA Style

Bernau, M., Gerster, U., & Scholz, A. M. (2022). Magnetic Resonance Imaging Used to Define the Optimum Needle Length in Pigs of Different Ages. Animals, 12(15), 1936. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151936

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop