| Literature DB >> 32130036 |
Ousmane Dramé1,2, Daniel Leclair1, E Jane Parmley3, Anne Deckert3, Blaise Ouattara1, Danielle Daignault4, André Ravel2.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health threat worldwide. The main objective of this study was to compare AMR in Campylobacter from broiler chickens raised on Canadian farms and their products in different geographical regions of Canada. To do this, antimicrobial susceptibility results from isolates of Campylobacter recovered from a national microbiological baseline study conducted in federally registered establishments and in the retail marketplace were analyzed. Among 1460 isolates tested, 774 (53%) were resistant to at least one antimicrobial, with a predominance of three profiles: tetracycline (39%), quinolone-tetracycline (6.6%), and quinolones only (3.5%). The results showed no significant difference in the frequency of resistant profiles (p ≥ 0.05) among the isolates originating from different points in the food processing chain at slaughterhouses and in retail establishments. This suggests that AMR observed in Campylobacter isolates from raw chicken at retail originated further upstream in the system. A difference in the frequency of certain resistance profiles was observed between the regions of Canada. For instance, in British Columbia, there was more resistance to quinolones, while in Ontario and Quebec, Campylobacter isolates were more resistant to tetracyclines, macrolides, ketolides, and lincosamides. Comparison of AMR data from this study with those from the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS) did not show any significant difference and provides evidence that CIPARS produces nationally representative resistance results.Entities:
Keywords: Campylobacter; Canada; antimicrobial resistance; baseline study; chicken
Year: 2020 PMID: 32130036 PMCID: PMC7415884 DOI: 10.1089/fpd.2019.2752
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foodborne Pathog Dis ISSN: 1535-3141 Impact factor: 3.171
Number of Campylobacter Isolates from Broilers and Chicken Products Tested for Antimicrobial Susceptibility by Sector Across Regions in Canada
| Sector | BC | Prairie | ON | QC | Atlantic | Canada |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slaughter | 220 (178;42;0) | 238 (201;37;0) | 174 (143;27;4)[ | 132 (123;9;0) | 80 (79;1;0) | 844 (724;116;4) |
| Processing | 142 (125;17;0) | 87 (76;11;0) | 85 (77;7;1) | 111 (106;5;0) | 31 (30;1;0) | 456 (414;41;1) |
| Retail | 20 (17;3;0) | 12 (11;1;0) | 86 (77;9;0) | 35 (30;5;0) | 7 (6;1;0) | 160 (141;19;0) |
| Total | 382 (320;62;0) | 337 (288;49;0) | 345 (297;43;5) | 278 (259;19;0) | 118 (115;3;0) | 1460 (1279;176;5) |
Number of Campylobacter isolates by species (Campylobacter jejuni; Campylobacter coli; Campylobacter spp.).
BC, British Columbia; ON, Ontario; QC, Quebec.
FIG. 1.Resistance of Campylobacter isolated along the broiler chicken commodity chain to five antimicrobial classes. (A) Tetracycline; (B) Quinolones; (C) Macrolides; (D) Lincosamide; (E) Ketolides. Presented values are proportions of resistant isolates with 95% confidence interval (error bars). BC, British Columbia; ON, Ontario; QC, Quebec. Color images are available online.
Resistance Profiles of Campylobacter Isolates Recovered from the National Microbiological Baseline Study, 2012–2013
| Resistance profile | C. jejuni ( | C. coli ( | Campylobacter spp. ( | All isolates ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Susceptible | 625 (48.9)[ | 61 (34.6) | 0 | 686 (46.9) |
| TET | 517 (40.4) | 56 (31.8) | 1 (20) | 574 (39.3) |
| CIP-NAL | 22 (1.7) | 25 (14.2) | 4 (80) | 52 (3.5) |
| CIP-NAL-TET | 85 (6.6) | 12 (6.8) | 0 | 97 (6.6) |
| GEN-TET | 1 (—[ | 0 | 0 | 1 (—[ |
| CLI | 1 (—[ | 0 | 0 | 1 (—[ |
| AZM-ERY | 3 (0.2) | 0 | 0 | 3 (0.2) |
| AZM-ERY-TET | 4 (0.3) | 1 (0.5) | 0 | 5 (0.3) |
| AZM-ERY-TEL-TET | 1 (—[ | 1 (0.5) | 0 | 2 (0.1) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI | 1 (—[ | 7 (4) | 0 | 8 (0.5) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TET | 1 (—[ | 0 | 0 | 1 (—[ |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TEL | 12 (0.9) | 5 (2.8) | 0 | 17 (1.1) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TEL-TET | 5 (0.4) | 4 (2.3) | 0 | 9 (0.6) |
| AZM-ERY-CIP–NAL-CLI-TEL | 0 | 1 (0.5) | 0 | 1 (—) |
| AZM-ERY-CIP-NAL-CLI-TEL-TET | 0 | 3 (1.7) | 0 | 3 (0.2) |
Percentage in brackets; (—) means percentage <0.01.
AZM, azithromycin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLI, clindamycin; ERY, erythromycin; GEN, gentamicin; FLR, florfenicol; NAL, nalidixic acid; TEL, telithromycin; TET, tetracycline.
Association Between the Campylobacter Resistance Profile and Species, Region, Sector, and Season According to a Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis
| Profile (number) | Compared with (number) | Species (reference | Region[ | Sector (reference | Season[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIP-NAL (149) | All other isolates (1306) | Atlantic: OR = 0.5, | Slaughter: OR = 0.6, | Summer = 0.9; | |
| Prairie: OR = 0.7, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 0.5, | |||||
| TET (691) | All other isolates (764) | Slaughter: OR = 1, | Summer: OR = 1, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 1, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 1, | |||||
| QC: OR = 0.9, | |||||
| TEL (32) | All other isolates (1423) | Slaughter: OR = 0.09, | Summer: OR = 0.8, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 0, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 2, | |||||
| QC: OR = 0.8, | |||||
| AZM-ERY (49) | All other isolates (1406) | Slaughter: OR = 0.8, | Summer: OR = 0.8, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 0.6, | |||||
| Abattoir: OR = 0.9, | |||||
| QC: OR = 1, | |||||
| CLI (40) | All other isolates (1415) | Slaughter: OR = 0.9, | Summer: OR = 0.9, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 0, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 1.3, | |||||
| QC: OR = 1, | |||||
| Resistance to at least one antimicrobial (769) | All fully susceptible isolates (686) | Slaughter: OR = 1.1, | Summer: OR = 1.1, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 1, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 1, | |||||
| QC: OR = 0.9, | |||||
| Only CIP-NAL (48) | All fully susceptible isolates (686) | Prairie: OR = 2.8, | Slaughter: OR = 0.8, | Summer: OR = 1, | |
| Atlantic: OR = 8, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 0.6, | |||||
| QC: OR = 5, | |||||
| Only CIP-NAL-TET (97) | All fully susceptible isolates (686) | Slaughter: OR = 0.7, | Summer: OR = 0.9, | ||
| Atlantic: OR = 0.3, | |||||
| BC: OR = 1.6, | Processing: OR = 0.6, | ||||
| Only TET (573) | All fully susceptible (686) | Prairie: OR = 0.7, | Slaughter: OR = 1.3, | Summer: OR = 1.2, | |
| Atlantic: OR = 1.2, | |||||
| Processing: OR = 1.2, | |||||
| QC: OR = 0.9, |
Winter corresponds to the winter–spring season (December to May) and Summer to the summer–fall season (June to November).
Bold indicates significant association (p < 0.05).
Regions include: BC, British Columbia; ON, Ontario; QC, Quebec; Prairie (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) and; Atlantic (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and Prince Edward Island).
FIG. 2.Resistance to selected antimicrobials in Campylobacter isolated from broiler chickens sampled along the commodity chain in 2013 according to CFIA's MBS and CIPARS data. Presented values are proportions of resistant isolates with 95% confidence interval (error bars). AZM, azithromycin; CFIA, Canadian Food Inspection Agency; CIPARS, Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance; CLI, clindamycin; ERY, erythromycin; GEN, gentamicin; FLR, florfenicol; MBS, microbiological baseline study; NAL, nalidixic acid; TEL, telithromycin; TET, tetracycline. Color images are available online.
Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles of Campylobacter Isolates Found in Broilers and Chicken Products According to Two Sources of Data
| Resistance profile | MBS | CIPARS |
|---|---|---|
| Fully susceptible | 431 (47.0)[ | 165 (45.7) |
| TET | 353 (38.5) | 131 (36.3) |
| CIP-NAL-TET | 65 (7.1) | 30 (8.3) |
| CIP-NAL | 36 (3.9) | 13 (3.6) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TEL | 10 (1.1) | 3 (0.8) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TEL-TET | 8 (0.9) | 3 (0.8) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI | 6 (0.6) | 3 (0.8) |
| AZM-ERY-TET | 3 (0.3) | 6 (1.7) |
| AZM-ERY-CIP-NAL-CLI-TEL-TET | 2 (0.2) | 1 (0.3) |
| AZM-ERY-TEL-TET | 2 (0.2) | 0 |
| AZM-ERY-CIP-NAL-CLI-TEL | 1 (0.1) | 0 |
| AZM-ERY | 0 | 3 (0.8) |
| AZM-ERY-CIP-NAL-CLI-TET | 0 | 1 (0.3) |
| AZM-ERY-CLI-TET | 0 | 1 (0.3) |
| AZM-ERY-TEL | 0 | 1 (0.3) |
| Total | 917 (100) | 361 (100) |
Percentage in brackets.
AZM, azithromycin; CIPARS, Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLI, clindamycin; ERY, erythromycin; GEN, gentamicin; FLR, florfenicol; MBS, microbiological baseline study; NAL, nalidixic acid; TEL, telithromycin; TET, tetracycline.