medigraphic.com
Centro de Investigaciones Regionales Dr. Hideyo Noguchi, Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán

2001, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Biomed 2001; 12 (3)

In vitro susceptibility of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae and Pasteurella multocida type 'A' strains to different antimicrobial agents.

Williams JJ, Salazar-Fajardo MR, Ramírez-Porras R, Mosqueda-Ara Z

Language: Spanish
References: 29
Page: 172-179
PDF size: 42.22 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the in vitro susceptibility of A pleuropneumoniae and P multocida type “A” strains to different antimicrobial agents. Materials and Methods. The Kirby-Bauer method was used for the antimicrobial susceptibility testing of 153 A pleuropneumoniae strains and 80 P multocida type “A” strains. The diameter of the zones of inhibition was measured for each antimicrobial agent using a calliper and the strains were reported as susceptible, resistant or intermediate. Results. One hundred and fifty two (99.3%) A pleuropneumoniae strains were susceptible to lincomycin + spectinomycin, 151 (98.7%) to enrofloxacin, 149 (97.4%) to sulphacloropiridoxin + trimethoprim, 148 (96.7%) to fosfomycin, 144 (94.1%) to penicillin and 140 (91.5%) to sodic cephtiofur. Also 152 (99.5%) strains were resistant to lincomycin, 139 (90.8%) to estreptomycin, 130 (85.0%) to tetracycline and 76 (49.7%) to ampicillin. In the cas of P multocida type “A”, 78 (97.5%) strains were susceotibles to enrofloxacin, 76 (95.0%) to ampicillin, 76 (95.0%) to fosfomycin, 74 (92.5%) to sulphacloropiridoxin + trimethoprim, and 72 (90.0%) to penicillin. Also 72 (90%) strains were resistant to estreptomycin and 48 (60.0%) strains were resistant to lincomycin. Discusion. The differences between the susceptibility of A pleuropneumoniae and P multocida strains could be related to the indiscriminate use of the antimicrobial agents in animal production with the induction of the development of more resistant strains caused by a predominantly selective effect.


REFERENCES

  1. Scott A. Porcine respiratory disease complex: “18 week wall”. Pig Intern 1997; 13 : 18-9.

  2. Fleck VM. Complejo respiratorio porcino. Cerdos 1998; (3) : 19-21.

  3. Guerrero RJ, Miyat JA, Gorham PL, Watkins LE, Brown H, Ose E, et al. Incidence and economic implications of pneumonia and atrophics rhinits in pigs in the USA and Canada. Proc. 10th Inter Cong Pig Vet Soc, Rio de Janeiro; 1988. p. 421.

  4. Hill MA, Scheidt AB, Teclaw RF, Clark LK, Knox KE, Jordan M. Association between growth indicators and volume of lesions in lungs from pigs at slaugther. Am J Vet Res 1992; 53:2221-3.

  5. Hill MA, Scheidt AB, Teclaw RF, Clark LK, Knox KE, Jordan M. Relationship between the indicators of performance and the weigth of pneumonic lesions from pigs at slaughter. Res Vet Sci 1994; 56:240-4.

  6. Monroy M, Doporto M, Zuniga J, Trujillo M. Evaluación en rastro: herramienta útil para controlar enfermedades (primera parte). Tec Avipec 1994; 7:11-7.

  7. Taylor D. Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae. En: Straw B, D`Allaire S, Mengeling W, Taylor D, editores. Disease of swine 8ª ed. Ames, Iowa USA. Iowa State University Press; 1999. p. 343-54.

  8. Amass S, Clark L, Van Alstine W, Bowersock, T, Murphy D, Knox K, Albregts S. Interaction of Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae and Pasteurella multocida infections in swine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994; 204:102-7.

  9. Schultz RA. Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae of swine: prevalence, treatment. Control y prevention. En: Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae compendium. Iowa, State, USA 1985. p. 34-8.

  10. Pijoan C. Serology and immunology of Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae. Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae compendium. Owa State, USA; 1985. p. 23-7.

  11. López J, Mercadillo A, Galván E, Ramírez G, Jiménez E, Haro M. Frecuencia de aislamientos de Pasteurella multocida A y D y Bordetella bronchiseptica a partir de hisopos nasales de 1986 a 1992. XXVIII Congreso de la Asociación Mexicana de Veterinarios Especialistas en Cerdos. Cancun, Qro.; 1993. p. 234-6.

  12. Jiménez E, Galván E, Mercadillo A, Jiménez E, Haro M. Serotipificación y detección de toxina dermonecrótica de Pasteurella multocida aisladas de lesiones neumónicas de pulmones de cerdos. XXVIII Congreso de la Asociación Mexicana de Veterinarios Especialistas en Cerdos. Cancun, Qro.; 1993. p. 232-3.

  13. Williams J, Torres M, Sansor R. Prevalencia, caracterización de las lesiones en pulmones de cerdos sacrificados en el rastro municipal de Mérida, Yucatán, México. Rev Biomed 2000; 11: 25-32.

  14. Williams J, Torres M, Echeverría P, Matos M. Aislamiento e identificación de Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae en pulmones de cerdos con pleuroneumonía crónica sacrificados en el rastro municipal de Mérida, Yucatán, México. Rev Biomed 2000; 11:175-81.

  15. Sumano H, Ocampo L. Farmacología Veterinaria. 2ª ed. México: McGraw-Hill; 1997. p. 95-106.

  16. Gilbride P, Rosendal S. Antimicrobial susceptibility of 51 strains of Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae. Can J Comp Med 1984; 48: 47-50.

  17. Dean J, Coloumber D, Smith D, Brendel K, Arner T, Dean A. Epi-Info ver. 6.02 a word processacing database and stadistics program for public health centers for disease control y prevention. (CDC) USA. Word Health Organization Geneva Swizerland; 1994.

  18. Pérez M. Las quinolonas: Estructura química, mecanismo de acción bactericida y perfil de farmacología clínica. Vet Méx 1992; 23: 57-66.

  19. Raemdonck D, Taner A, Tolling S, Michener S. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Pasteurella multocida, Salmonella choleraesuis isolates from pigs. Vet Rec 1994; 134 : 5-7.

  20. Galván P, Jiménez G, Haro T, Ramírez H, Mercadillo S. Resistencia presentada a diferentes antibióticos por Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Pasteurella multocida tipos A y D. Vet Méx 1993; 48 : 216-20.

  21. Márquez V, Morales M, López L. Evaluación de la susceptibilidad bactericida in vitro que presentaron las cepas de Salmonella spp, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Pasteurella multocida, y Estreptoccocos suis, aisladas de casos clínicos de cerdos durante 1997 a Mayo de 1999, frente a 16 diferentes quimioterapéuticos. XXXIV Congreso Nacional de la Asociación de Médicos Veterinarios Especialistas en Cerdos, Mérida, Yucatán; 1999. p. 208-211.

  22. World Health Organization. The medical impact of the use of antimicrobials in food animals. Report and Proceedings of a World Health Organization meeting. Berlin, Germany 1997. p. 5-9.

  23. Farcas A. Algunos aspectos de farmacológicos de la terapéutica antibiótica. Tec Avipec 1998; 125 : 40-2.

  24. Willson J. Haemophilus, Actinobacillus, Pasteurella: Mechanisms of resistance and antibiotic therapy. Can J Vet Res 1990; 54 : S73- S77.

  25. Delaat A. Microbiología. 2ª ed.México: Panamericana; 1976. p. 197- 204.

  26. Hirsh DC, Martin LD, Libal MC. Plasmids mediated antimicrobial resistence in Haemophilus pleuropneumoniae Can J Comp Med 1982; 43 : 269-72.

  27. Lara y Lara J. Empleo de antimicrobianos en producción animal y sus consecuencias en salud pública. Tesis de Maestría. Escuela Superior de Checoslovaquia 1985.

  28. Jawetz E, Melnick LJ, Adelberg AE. Microbiología Médica. 11ª ed. México: Manual Moderno; 1985. p. 119-50.

  29. Coté S, Harel J, Higgins R, Jacques M. Resistance to antimicrobial agents and prevalence of R plasmids in Pasteurella multocida from swine. Ame J Vet Res 1991; 52: 1653-7.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com