Editorial Type:
Antimicrobials

Bactericidal effects of various concentrations of enrofloxacin, florfenicol, tilmicosin phosphate, and tulathromycin on clinical isolates of Mannheimia haemolytica

Joseph M. Blondeau Department of Clinical Microbiology, Royal University Hospital, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.
Saskatoon Health Region, 701 Queen St, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0W8, Canada.

Search for other papers by Joseph M. Blondeau in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 PhD
,
Shantelle D. Shebelski Department of Clinical Microbiology, Royal University Hospital, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Shantelle D. Shebelski in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 BSc
, and
Christine K. Hesje Department of Microbiology and Immunology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4, Canada.

Search for other papers by Christine K. Hesje in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 MSc
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.76.10.860
Volume/Issue:
Volume 76: Issue 10
Online Publication Date:
01 Oct 2015
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine bactericidal effects of enrofloxacin, florfenicol, tilmicosin, and tulathromycin on clinical isolates of Mannheimia haemolytica at various bacterial densities and drug concentrations.

SAMPLE 4 unique isolates of M haemolytica recovered from clinically infected cattle.

PROCEDURES Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and mutant prevention concentration (MPC) were determined for each drug and isolate. Mannheimia haemolytica suspensions (106 to 109 CFUs/mL) were exposed to the determined MIC and MPC and preestablished maximum serum and tissue concentrations of each drug. Log10 reduction in viable cells (percentage of cells killed) was measured at various points.

RESULTS Bacterial killing at the MIC was slow and incomplete. After 2 hours of isolate exposure to the MPC and maximum serum and tissue concentrations of the tested drugs, 91% to almost 100% cell killing was achieved with enrofloxacin, compared with 8% growth to 93% cell killing with florfenicol, 199% growth to 63% cell killing with tilmicosin, and 128% growth to 43% cell killing with tulathromycin over the range of inoculum tested. For all drugs, killing of viable organisms was evident at all bacterial densities tested; however, killing was more substantial at the MPC and maximum serum and tissue drug concentrations than at the MIC and increased with duration of drug exposure. Rank order of drugs by killing potency was enrofloxacin, florfenicol, tilmicosin, and tulathromycin.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Findings suggested that antimicrobial doses that equaled or exceeded the MPC provided rapid killing of M haemolytica by the tested drugs, decreasing opportunities for antimicrobial-resistant subpopulations of bacteria to develop during drug exposure.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine bactericidal effects of enrofloxacin, florfenicol, tilmicosin, and tulathromycin on clinical isolates of Mannheimia haemolytica at various bacterial densities and drug concentrations.

SAMPLE 4 unique isolates of M haemolytica recovered from clinically infected cattle.

PROCEDURES Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and mutant prevention concentration (MPC) were determined for each drug and isolate. Mannheimia haemolytica suspensions (106 to 109 CFUs/mL) were exposed to the determined MIC and MPC and preestablished maximum serum and tissue concentrations of each drug. Log10 reduction in viable cells (percentage of cells killed) was measured at various points.

RESULTS Bacterial killing at the MIC was slow and incomplete. After 2 hours of isolate exposure to the MPC and maximum serum and tissue concentrations of the tested drugs, 91% to almost 100% cell killing was achieved with enrofloxacin, compared with 8% growth to 93% cell killing with florfenicol, 199% growth to 63% cell killing with tilmicosin, and 128% growth to 43% cell killing with tulathromycin over the range of inoculum tested. For all drugs, killing of viable organisms was evident at all bacterial densities tested; however, killing was more substantial at the MPC and maximum serum and tissue drug concentrations than at the MIC and increased with duration of drug exposure. Rank order of drugs by killing potency was enrofloxacin, florfenicol, tilmicosin, and tulathromycin.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Findings suggested that antimicrobial doses that equaled or exceeded the MPC provided rapid killing of M haemolytica by the tested drugs, decreasing opportunities for antimicrobial-resistant subpopulations of bacteria to develop during drug exposure.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Blondeau (joseph.blondeau@saskatoonhealthregion.ca).
Cover American Journal of Veterinary Research
American Journal of Veterinary Research
Publication Date:
01 Oct 2015

  • 1. Dagan R, Klugman KP, Craig WA, et al. Evidence to support the rationale that bacterial eradication in respiratory tract infection is an important aim of antimicrobial therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 47: 129–140.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 2. Bryson DG. Calf pneumonia. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 1985; 1: 237–257.

  • 3. Ames TR. Dairy calf pneumonia: the disease and its impact. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 1997; 13: 379–391.

  • 4. Loneragan GH, Gould DH, Mason GL, et al. Involvement of microbial respiratory pathogens in acute interstitial pneumonia in feedlot cattle. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 1519–1524.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 5. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Approved standard—8th edition (M07–A8). Wayne, Pa: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2009.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 6. Blondeau JM, Zhao X, Hansen GT, et al. Mutant prevention concentrations (MPC) of fluoroquinolones for clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45: 433–438.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 7. Blondeau JM, Hansen G, Metzler KL, et al. The role of PK/PD parameters to avoid selection and increase of resistance: mutant prevention concentration. J Chemother 2004; 16: 1–19.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 8. Blondeau JM. New concepts in antimicrobial susceptibility testing: the mutant prevention concentration and mutant selection window approach. Vet Dermatol 2009; 20: 383–396.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 9. Metzler K, Drlica K, Blondeau JM. Minimal inhibitory and mutant prevention concentrations for azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin with clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother 2013; 68: 631–635.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 10. Blondeau JM, Borsos S, Blondeau LD, et al. Comparative minimum inhibitory and mutant prevention drug concentrations of enrofloxacin, ceftiofur, florfenicol, tilmicosin and tulathromycin against bovine isolates of Mannheimia haemolytica. Vet Microbiol 2012; 160: 85–90.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 11. Frisch AW, Tripp JT, Barrett CD Jr, et al. The specific polysaccharide content of pneumonic lungs. J Exp Med 1942; 76: 505–510.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Fagon JY, Chastre J, Trouillet JL, et al. Characterization of distal bronchial microflora during acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis. Use of the protected specimen brush technique in 54 mechanically ventilated patients. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990; 142: 1004–1008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 13. Feldman WE. Concentrations of bacteria in cerebrospinal fluid of patients with bacterial meningitis. J Pediatr 1976; 88: 549–552.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 14. Bingen E, Lambert-Zechovsky N, Mariani-Kurkdjian P, et al. Bacterial counts in cerebrospinal fluid of children with meningitis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1990; 9: 278–281.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 15. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution susceptibility tests for bacteria isolated from animals. Approved standard—4th edition and supplement (VET01A4E and VET01S2E). 4th ed. Wayne, Pa: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 16. Blondeau JM, Hansen G, Metzler KL, et al. Optimal killing of Streptococcus pneumoniae by gemifloxacin, levofloxacin and moxifloxacin. In: Gillespie SH, Tillotson GS, eds. Novel perspectives in antibacterial action. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press Ltd, 2002;15–26.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 17. Blondeau JM, Blondeau LD, Hesje C, et al. Application of two methods to determine killing of Streptococcus pneumoniae by various fluoroquinolones. J Chemother 2006; 18: 366–372.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 18. Taylor JD, Fulton RW, Lehenbauer TW, et al. The epidemiology of bovine respiratory disease: what is the evidence for predisposing factors? Can Vet J 2010; 51: 1095–1102.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 19. Lillie LE. The bovine respiratory disease complex. Can Vet J 1974; 15: 233–242.

  • 20. Schneider MJ, Tait RG Jr, Busby WD, et al. An evaluation of bovine respiratory disease complex in feedlot cattle: impact on performance and carcass traits using treatment records and lung lesion scores. J Anim Sci 2009; 87: 1821–1827.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 21. Wilson R, Schentag JJ, Ball P, et al. A comparison of gemifloxacin and clarithromycin in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and long-term clinical outcomes. Clin Ther 2002; 24: 639–652.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 22. Chodosh S, Schreurs A, Siami G, et al. Efficacy of oral ciprofloxacin vs clarithromycin for treatment of acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27: 730–738.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 23. Vanderkooi OG, Low DE, Green K, et al. Predicting antimicrobial resistance in invasive pneumococcal infections. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 40: 1288–1297.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 24. Boswell FJ, Andrews JM, Wise R, et al. Bactericidal properties of moxifloxacin and post-antibiotic effect. J Antimicrob Chemother 1999; 43: 43–49.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 25. Lees P, Concordet D, Aliabadi FS, et al. Chapter 5: drug selection and optimization of dosage schedules to minimize antimicrobial resistance. In: Aarestrap FM, ed. Antimicrobial resistance in bacteria of animal origin. Washington, DC: ASM Press, 2006; 49–71.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 26. Hansen GT, Metzler KL, Drlica K, et al. Mutant prevention concentration of gemifloxacin for clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47: 440–441.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 27. Dong Y, Zhao X, Domagala J, et al. Effect of fluoroquinolone concentration on selection of resistant mutants of Mycobacterium bovis BCG and Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43: 1756–1758.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement