Randomized field trial comparing the efficacy of florfenicol and oxytetracycline in a natural outbreak of calf pneumonia using lung reaeration as a cure criterion.
Mycoplasma bovis
antibiotics
bovine respiratory disease
precision medicine
rational antimicrobial use
thoracic ultrasound
Journal
Journal of veterinary internal medicine
ISSN: 1939-1676
Titre abrégé: J Vet Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8708660
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
revised:
10
12
2021
received:
23
06
2021
accepted:
21
12
2021
pubmed:
8
1
2022
medline:
1
4
2022
entrez:
7
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Respiratory infections are the main indication for antimicrobial use in calves. Optimal treatment duration currently is unknown, but shorter duration would likely decrease selection for antimicrobial resistance. Determine differences in cure rate and healing time between animals treated with florfenicol and oxytetracycline in a natural outbreak of respiratory disease using reaeration observed on thoracic ultrasound examination as healing criterion. Commercial farm housing 130, 3 to 9 month old Belgian blue beef calves. Randomized clinical trial during an outbreak of respiratory disease. Metaphylactic treatment was initiated, randomly treating animals with either florfenicol or oxytetracycline. Ultrasonographic follow-up was done the first day and every other day for a 14-day period. At the individual animal level, treatment was discontinued when reaeration of the lungs occurred. Differences in cure rate and healing time were determined. Of the 130 animals studied, 67.7% developed a lung consolidation ≥0.5 cm. The mean ultrasonographic healing time was 2.5 days in the florfenicol group compared to 3.1 days in the oxytetracycline group (P = .04). After single treatment, 80.6% and 60.3% had no consolidations in the florfenicol and oxytetracycline groups, respectively (P = .01). A Mycoplasma bovis strain was genetically and phenotypically determined to be susceptible to both antimicrobials. Ultrasonographic lung reaeration shows potential as a cure criterion to rationalize antimicrobial use for outbreaks of pneumonia. In our study, florfenicol resulted in a faster cure and higher reduction in antimicrobial usage than did oxytetracycline.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Respiratory infections are the main indication for antimicrobial use in calves. Optimal treatment duration currently is unknown, but shorter duration would likely decrease selection for antimicrobial resistance.
HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
Determine differences in cure rate and healing time between animals treated with florfenicol and oxytetracycline in a natural outbreak of respiratory disease using reaeration observed on thoracic ultrasound examination as healing criterion.
ANIMALS
METHODS
Commercial farm housing 130, 3 to 9 month old Belgian blue beef calves.
METHODS
METHODS
Randomized clinical trial during an outbreak of respiratory disease. Metaphylactic treatment was initiated, randomly treating animals with either florfenicol or oxytetracycline. Ultrasonographic follow-up was done the first day and every other day for a 14-day period. At the individual animal level, treatment was discontinued when reaeration of the lungs occurred. Differences in cure rate and healing time were determined.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of the 130 animals studied, 67.7% developed a lung consolidation ≥0.5 cm. The mean ultrasonographic healing time was 2.5 days in the florfenicol group compared to 3.1 days in the oxytetracycline group (P = .04). After single treatment, 80.6% and 60.3% had no consolidations in the florfenicol and oxytetracycline groups, respectively (P = .01). A Mycoplasma bovis strain was genetically and phenotypically determined to be susceptible to both antimicrobials.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE
CONCLUSIONS
Ultrasonographic lung reaeration shows potential as a cure criterion to rationalize antimicrobial use for outbreaks of pneumonia. In our study, florfenicol resulted in a faster cure and higher reduction in antimicrobial usage than did oxytetracycline.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34994480
doi: 10.1111/jvim.16348
pmc: PMC8965221
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
florfenicol
9J97307Y1H
Thiamphenicol
FLQ7571NPM
Oxytetracycline
X20I9EN955
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial, Veterinary
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
820-828Subventions
Organisme : Agentschap Innoveren en Ondernemen
ID : HBC.2019.2876 KRIS
Organisme : Agentschap Innoveren en Ondernemen
ID : 04570416
Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine.
Références
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003 Feb;47(2):820-3
pubmed: 12543702
J Vet Intern Med. 2015 May-Jun;29(3):770-80
pubmed: 25929158
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2015 Nov;31(3):441-53, vii
pubmed: 26253265
Pathogens. 2020 Jul 30;9(8):
pubmed: 32751555
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012 Apr;67(4):1027-38
pubmed: 22262796
J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Jan;38(1):27-37
pubmed: 29732586
Prev Vet Med. 2012 Jun 1;105(1-2):93-100
pubmed: 22326046
Pathogens. 2020 Jul 21;9(7):
pubmed: 32708285
Prev Vet Med. 2014 Feb 1;113(2):231-40
pubmed: 24269039
J Vet Intern Med. 2015 Nov-Dec;29(6):1728-34
pubmed: 26332345
Antibiotics (Basel). 2020 Dec 09;9(12):
pubmed: 33316982
J Anim Sci. 2020 Apr 1;98(4):
pubmed: 32255182
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Mar;103(3):2556-2566
pubmed: 31954585
Vet Rec. 2014 Oct 4;175(13):325
pubmed: 24899065
Vet Rec. 2016 Jul 2;179(1):18
pubmed: 27114405
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2015 Mar;31(1):97-111, vi
pubmed: 25578389
J Dairy Sci. 2019 Jan;102(1):607-618
pubmed: 30415845
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2016 Mar;32(1):19-35
pubmed: 26922110
J Dairy Sci. 2013 Jul;96(7):4523-8
pubmed: 23628251
Microbiol Spectr. 2021 Oct 31;9(2):e0026221
pubmed: 34612702
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019 Jun 17;85(13):
pubmed: 31053579
Vet Res. 2020 Sep 23;51(1):121
pubmed: 32967727
J Dairy Sci. 1996 Jun;79(6):1040-9
pubmed: 8827469
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2006 Jul;22(2):399-411
pubmed: 16814024
Vet Rec. 2011 Sep 10;169(11):278
pubmed: 21831999
Crit Care Med. 2010 Jan;38(1):84-92
pubmed: 19633538
J Dairy Sci. 2019 May;102(5):4322-4331
pubmed: 30827549
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2020 Jul;36(2):399-423
pubmed: 32451033
J Dairy Sci. 2012 Jan;95(1):247-54
pubmed: 22192204
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 May 26;58(6):
pubmed: 32229599
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2010 Jul;26(2):365-79
pubmed: 20619190
J Vet Intern Med. 2017 May;31(3):946-953
pubmed: 28425146
Vet J. 2020 May - Jun;259-260:105474
pubmed: 32553237
Microbiol Immunol. 2017 Jun;61(6):215-224
pubmed: 28504455
J Dairy Sci. 1995 Dec;78(12):2819-30
pubmed: 8675764
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2009 Nov;25(3):633-49, Table of Contents
pubmed: 19825437
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2012 Nov;24(6):1172-6
pubmed: 23051828
Pathog Dis. 2017 Sep 29;75(7):
pubmed: 28830074
J Vet Intern Med. 2016 Jul;30(4):1396-401
pubmed: 27305277
Prev Vet Med. 2015 May 1;119(3-4):227-31
pubmed: 25794838
EFSA J. 2017 Jan 24;15(1):e04666
pubmed: 32625259
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Dec;103(12):11723-11735
pubmed: 33222860
Res Vet Sci. 2019 Aug;125:185-188
pubmed: 31252368
J Vet Intern Med. 2022 Mar;36(2):820-828
pubmed: 34994480
Microb Biotechnol. 2020 May;13(3):669-682
pubmed: 31663669
Can J Vet Res. 1986 Jul;50(3):314-7
pubmed: 3742366