Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A European survey of antimicrobial susceptibility among zoonotic and commensal bacteria isolated from food-producing animals.

OBJECTIVE: To study antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic bacteria isolated from food animals in different countries using uniform methodology.

METHODS: Samples were taken at slaughter from chickens, pigs and cattle in four EU countries per host. Escherichia coli (indicator organism; n = 2118), Salmonella spp. (n = 271) and Campylobacter spp. (n = 1325) were isolated in national laboratories and MICs tested in a central laboratory against, where appropriate, ampicillin, cefepime, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, gentamicin, nalidixic acid, streptomycin, tetracycline and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.

RESULTS: Isolation rates were high for E. coli, low for Salmonella and intermediate for Campylobacter. MIC results showed resistance prevalence varied among compounds, hosts and countries. For E. coli and Salmonella, resistance to newer compounds (cefepime, cefotaxime, ciprofloxacin) was absent or low, but to older compounds (except gentamicin), resistance was variable and higher. E. coli isolates from Sweden showed low resistance, whereas among isolates from Spain (pigs), resistance to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, streptomycin, tetracycline and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was higher; the UK, France, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Denmark were intermediate. For Campylobacter spp. isolates from chickens, nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin resistance was >30% in France and the Netherlands, >6% in the UK and zero in Sweden. Nalidixic acid resistance was high in cattle (20%-64%), whereas ciprofloxacin resistance was markedly lower in cattle, variable in pigs (3%-21%) and highest in Sweden. Generally, Campylobacter coli was more resistant than Campylobacter jejuni.

CONCLUSION: Antimicrobial resistance among enteric organisms in food animals varied among countries, particularly for older antimicrobials, but resistance to newer compounds used to treat disease in humans was generally low.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app