| Autor: |
Velasova, Martina, Smith, Richard, Chaintarli, Katerina, Mesa-Varona, Octavio, Tenhagen, Bernd-Alois, Amat, Jean-Philippe, Madec, Jean-Yves, Anjum, Muna F. |
| Rok vydání: |
2021 |
| DOI: |
10.5281/zenodo.4786342 |
| Popis: |
The aim was to compare the occurrence and trends in the prevalence of antimicrobial resistant Escherichia coli isolates from clinical submissions from cattle, pigs and chicken between Germany, UK and France. Results from antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) were extracted from the UK and German diagnostic surveillance system. French data were extracted from the “RESAPATH” report in an aggregated format. German AST results were obtained using microbroth dilution, UK and French data using disc diffusion although obtained on different media: Iso-sensitest agar (UK) and Muller-Hinton media (France). The percentage of resistant isolates estimated according to each country’s method was compared for those antimicrobials that overlapped between all three countries and all three species. The results showed only four such antimicrobials: amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, neomycin, sulphamethoxazole/trimethoprim and tetracycline. The highest resistance levels were seen to tetracycline in pigs and cattle in both UK and France compared to Germany. The lowest resistance levels were seen to neomycin, in particular in chicken in France. In conclusion, there was a great variation in resistance between countries and livestock species, with cattle and pigs showing a higher level of resistance to the majority of antimicrobials compared. There were substantial differences in laboratory methods, breakpoints and interpretation criteria adopted between the countries. As such there was not a single standard that could be applied to the AST data for comparison between all three countries. The number of submissions received from the individual livestock species, contribution from different age classes and the source population (only clinical cases) have to be also considered when interpreting these results. Differences in methods, and limitations in data recording that became apparent during analysis, highlight an area that requires improvements to facilitate comparisons of the results from clinical AMR surveillance between countries in future. |
| Databáze: |
OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
