Comparative assessment of different ivermectin and doramectin formulations for mange control in grazing steers.


Journal

Veterinary parasitology
ISSN: 1873-2550
Titre abrégé: Vet Parasitol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7602745

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2023
Historique:
received: 14 12 2022
revised: 02 02 2023
accepted: 03 02 2023
pubmed: 14 2 2023
medline: 21 3 2023
entrez: 13 2 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Psoroptic mange causes relevant losses of productivity in cattle. Macrocyclic lactones are one of the main pharmacological tools recommended for controlling it. The aim of the current work was to compare the relationship between the pharmacokinetic behavior and the effectiveness of both ivermectin (IVM) and doramectin (DRM) following their administration as either the traditional (1 %) or long-acting (3.15-3.5 %) injectable formulations to cattle naturally infected with Psoroptes ovis. The overall work involved three trials (1, 2 and 3) carried out on commercial beef cattle farms (grazing systems). In Trial 1, 20 grazing steers with active mange infection were allocated into 2 groups (n = 10) and treated subcutaneously (SC) with either IVM (1 %) or DRM (1%) at 0.2 mg/kg. In Trial 2, 16 grazing steers with active mange divided in 2 groups (n = 8) were treated SC with either IVM 1 % (0.2 mg/kg) or IVM 3.15 % long-acting (0.63 mg/kg). In Trial 3, 2 groups of mange infected steers (n = 8) were treated SC with either IVM 3.15 % (0.63 mg/kg) or DRM 3.5 % (0.7 mg/kg). Blood samples were collected of each experimental group and the drug systemic availability was estimated by measuring of IVM/DRM concentrations by HPLC. Skin scraping samples were collected from each animal and mites were counted at 14, 21 and 28 days post-treatment. In Trial 1, the mite density score on day 14 was significantly lower for DRM (0.60) compared to IVM (1.80) (P = 0.019). Based on the number of animals clinically cured (negative to the presence of mites), the efficacy of DRM was higher (80 %) than that obtained for IVM (10 %) (P < 0.05). DRM systemic exposure measured as AUC was 1.37-fold higher compared to IVM. In Trial 2, even though IVM exposure was significantly greater after the long-acting (3.15 %) compared to the traditional formulation (1 %), none of the treatments significantly reduced the mite density score, with a percentage of animals cured between 0 % and 37.5 % after both IVM treatments. In Trial 3, the 100 % of cured animals were achieved at day 21 (IVM 3.15 %) and at day 28 (DRM 3.5 %) post-treatment. In conclusion, DRM treatment could offer some therapeutic advantages in field situations where IVM fails to control mange. Depending on the level of susceptibility of the mite population, long-acting pharmaceutical formulations can be useful to control Psoroptic mange in cattle. The use of macrocyclic lactones for mange control in cattle should be based on appropriate diagnosis on each individual farm.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36780819
pii: S0304-4017(23)00022-5
doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2023.109891
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

doramectin KGD7A54H5P
Ivermectin 70288-86-7

Types de publication

Clinical Trial, Veterinary Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

109891

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest statement There are no potential conflicts of interest associated with this study.

Auteurs

Candela Canton (C)

Laboratorio de Farmacología, Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil (CIVETAN), UNCPBA-CICPBA-CONICET, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (UNCPBA), Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Electronic address: ccanton@vet.unicen.edu.ar.

Sebastián Muchiut (S)

Laboratorio de Inmunología y Parasitología, Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria, Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Rafaela, 2300 Rafaela, Santa Fe, Argentina.

María Paula Dominguez (MP)

Laboratorio de Farmacología, Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil (CIVETAN), UNCPBA-CICPBA-CONICET, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (UNCPBA), Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Carlos Lanusse (C)

Laboratorio de Farmacología, Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil (CIVETAN), UNCPBA-CICPBA-CONICET, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (UNCPBA), Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Luis Ignacio Alvarez (LI)

Laboratorio de Farmacología, Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil (CIVETAN), UNCPBA-CICPBA-CONICET, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (UNCPBA), Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Adrián Lifschitz (A)

Laboratorio de Farmacología, Centro de Investigación Veterinaria de Tandil (CIVETAN), UNCPBA-CICPBA-CONICET, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires (UNCPBA), Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Campus Universitario, Tandil, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH