Literature DB >> 21819210

Ceftiofur use in finishing swine barns and the recovery of fecal Escherichia coli or Salmonella spp. resistant to ceftriaxone.

Eric A Lutz1, Marlena J McCarty, Dixie F Mollenkopf, Julie A Funk, Wondwossen A Gebreyes, Thomas E Wittum.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the association between ceftiofur use policy in finishing swine barns and recovery of fecal Escherichia coli or Salmonella spp. resistant to ceftriaxone. The study population included 54 finishing swine barns from three companies located in North Carolina. The barns were each classified according to their reported therapeutic ceftiofur use rates of "Rare," "Moderate," and "Common." Fecal samples from the barns were cultured for the presence of E. coli and Salmonella spp. resistant to ceftriaxone using selective media designed to recover rare organisms expressing the AmpC β-lactamase phenotype. A total of 1899 swine fecal samples yielded 1193 E. coli (63%) resistant to ceftriaxone. Recovery rates by ceftiofur use classification were 45% for Rare, 73% for Moderate, and 68% Common ceftiofur use groups. Barns reporting Rare ceftiofur use had a lower odds of recovery of E. coli (OR=0.32; p<0.001) resistant to ceftriaxone compared to Common use barns. The overall Salmonella spp. prevalence was 63.8% (n=714). Of these, 65 Salmonella were resistant to ceftriaxone with the highest rate (6%) found in the Common ceftiofur use group, followed by Rare (4.1%) and Moderate (0.15%). The odds of recovery of Salmonella resistant to ceftriaxone were similar for barns with ceftiofur use classified as Rare and Common. Samples from barns with ceftiofur use classified as Moderate had a lower odds (OR=0.02; p<0.01) of recovery of Salmonella resistant to ceftriaxone than barns classified as Common. Our result is consistent with the hypothesis that the use of ceftiofur in finishing swine barns, beyond its rare application, may influence the recovery of enteric E. coli with resistance to cephalosporin drugs, although other unmeasured factors appear to be important in the recovery of cephalosporin-resistant Salmonella. The dissemination of enteric bacteria with resistance to cephalosporins has the potential to impact both veterinary and human therapeutic treatment options.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21819210     DOI: 10.1089/fpd.2011.0925

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foodborne Pathog Dis        ISSN: 1535-3141            Impact factor:   3.171


  10 in total

1.  Impact of ceftiofur injection on gut microbiota and Escherichia coli resistance in pigs.

Authors:  M A Fleury; G Mourand; E Jouy; F Touzain; L Le Devendec; C de Boisseson; F Eono; R Cariolet; A Guérin; O Le Goff; S Blanquet-Diot; M Alric; I Kempf
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  First Characterization of CTX-M-15-Producing Escherichia coli Strains Belonging to Sequence Type (ST) 410, ST224, and ST1284 from Commercial Swine in South America.

Authors:  Ketrin C Silva; Marina Moreno; Carlos Cabrera; Beny Spira; Louise Cerdeira; Nilton Lincopan; Andrea M Moreno
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Effects of ceftiofur treatment on the susceptibility of commensal porcine E.coli--comparison between treated and untreated animals housed in the same stable.

Authors:  Anne Beyer; Sven Baumann; Gesine Scherz; Jessica Stahl; Martin von Bergen; Anika Friese; Uwe Roesler; Manfred Kietzmann; Walther Honscha
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 2.741

4.  Population dynamics of enteric Salmonella in response to antimicrobial use in beef feedlot cattle.

Authors:  Naomi Ohta; Keri N Norman; Bo Norby; Sara D Lawhon; Javier Vinasco; Henk den Bakker; Guy H Loneragan; H Morgan Scott
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Effects of intramuscularly administered enrofloxacin on the susceptibility of commensal intestinal Escherichia coli in pigs (sus scrofa domestica).

Authors:  Antje Römer; Gesine Scherz; Saskia Reupke; Jessica Meißner; Jürgen Wallmann; Manfred Kietzmann; Heike Kaspar
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  Treatment of pigs with enrofloxacin via different oral dosage forms - environmental contaminations and resistance development of Escherichia coli.

Authors:  Paula Janssen; Gesine Barton; Manfred Kietzmann; Jessica Meißner
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 1.672

Review 7.  Ceftiofur-resistant Salmonella enterica serovar Heidelberg of poultry origin - a risk profile using the Codex framework.

Authors:  Carolee Carson; Xian-Zhi Li; Agnes Agunos; Daleen Loest; Brennan Chapman; Rita Finley; Manisha Mehrotra; Lauren M Sherk; Réjean Gaumond; Rebecca Irwin
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 2.451

8.  Antimicrobial usage in pig production: Effects on Escherichia coli virulence profiles and antimicrobial resistance.

Authors:  Rukayya H Abubakar; Evelyn Madoroba; Oluwawemimo Adebowale; Olubunmi G Fasanmi; Folorunso O Fasina
Journal:  Onderstepoort J Vet Res       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 1.792

9.  Molecular Detection of Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli Isolated from Different Sources.

Authors:  Momna Rubab; Deog-Hwan Oh
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-24

10.  Intestinal Exposure to Ceftiofur and Cefquinome after Intramuscular Treatment and the Impact of Ceftiofur on the Pig Fecal Microbiome and Resistome.

Authors:  Sofie Rutjens; Nick Vereecke; Ward De Spiegelaere; Siska Croubels; Mathias Devreese
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-04
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.