Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Daniel J. Weigel x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

Objective—To compare concentrations of danofloxacin, enrofloxacin, and ciprofloxacin in plasma and respiratory tissues of calves treated after challenge with Mannheimia haemolytica.

Animals—75 calves.

Procedure—24 hours after challenge with M haemolytica, 72 calves with clinical signs of respiratory tract disease were randomly assigned to 1 of 12 equal treatment groups. Three nonchallenged, nontreated calves formed a control group. Challenged calves were treated with danofloxacin (6 and 8 mg/kg, SC) and enrofloxacin (8 mg/kg, SC) once. At 1, 2, 6, and 12 hours after treatment, 6 calves from each treatment group were euthanatized. Antimicrobial drug concentrations were assayed in various specimens. Peak plasma concentration (Cmax)-to-minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC; Cmax-to-MIC) ratios and the area under the concentration versus time curve over a 12-hour period-to-MIC ratios (AUC12h-to-MIC) were calculated.

Results—Danofloxacin and enrofloxacin had MICs of 0.03 µg/mL for the M haemolytica challenge isolate. Danofloxacin administered at doses of 6 and 8 mg/kg resulted in numerically higher geometric mean concentrations of danofloxacin in plasma and all respiratory tissues than geometric mean concentrations of enrofloxacin after treatment with enrofloxacin. Geometric mean concentrations of enrofloxacin were numerically higher than geometric mean concentrations of ciprofloxacin metabolite in plasma and almost all respiratory tissues. Danofloxacin and enrofloxacin achieved Cmax-to-MIC ratios > 10 and AUC12h-to-MIC ratios > 125 hours.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance— When used to treat pneumonic pasteurellosis in calves, danofloxacin and enrofloxacin can be expected to deliver concentration-dependent bactericidal activity against M haemolytica, the bacteria most commonly associated with bovine respiratory tract disease. (Am J Vet Res 2005;66:342–349)

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the efficacy and safety of administration of cefovecin, compared with cefadroxil, for treatment of naturally occurring secondary superficial pyoderma, abscesses, and infected wounds in dogs.

Design—Multicenter, randomized, positive-controlled clinical trial.

Animals—235 client-owned dogs.

Procedures—Dogs with clinical signs of skin infection confirmed via bacteriologic culture were randomly allocated to receive a single SC injection of cefovecin (8 mg/kg [3.6 mg/lb]) followed by placebo administered PO twice daily for 14 days or cefadroxil (22 mg/kg [10 mg/lb]) administered PO twice daily for 14 days following a placebo injection. Two 14-day treatment courses were permitted. Treatment success was defined as reduction of clinical signs to mild or absent at the final assessment.

Results—Clinical efficacy achieved with cefovecin in dogs was equivalent to that observed with cefadroxil. At the final assessment, 14 days following the completion of treatment (on day 28 or 42), 92.4% (109/118) of the cefovecin group and 92.3% (108/117) of the cefadroxil group were treatment successes. There were no serious adverse events or deaths related to treatment.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—A single cefovecin injection (8 mg/kg) administered SC, which could be repeated once after 14 days, was safe and effective against naturally occurring skin infections in dogs and as effective as cefadroxil administered PO twice daily for 14 or 28 days.

Restricted access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

Objective—To assess the serologic response of calves to inactivated and modified-live (ML) Mannheimia haemolytica (MH) preparations given alone and concurrently with combination viral vaccines containing ML bovine herpesvirus type 1 (BHV-1).

Animals—642 calves seronegative for BHV-1.

Procedures—In experiment 1, 192 calves received 1 of 3 MH preparations alone or concurrently received 1 of 3 MH preparations and 1 of 4 combination viral vaccines. In experiment 2, 450 calves received 1 of 4 MH preparations alone or concurrently received 1 of 4 MH preparations and 1 of 5 combination viral vaccines. Pretreatment and posttreatment blood samples were processed to obtain serum, which was analyzed to detect concentrations of antibodies against MH leukotoxin and BHV-1.

Results—In experiment 1, antibody titers against MH leukotoxin in calves receiving MH and ML virus vaccine appeared decreased, albeit nonsignificantly, compared with titers for calves receiving MH preparations alone. In experiment 2, all groups (except for 1) concurrently receiving an MH preparation and viral vaccine had a significant decrease in antibodies against MH leukotoxin. In both experiments, there was a significant decrease in the number of calves responding to MH leukotoxin when ML viral vaccine was coadministered.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Coadministration of ML BHV-1 and MH preparations interfered with the serologic response to MH leukotoxin in calves seronegative for BHV-1. Serologic response to MH leukotoxin may be substantially improved in seronegative calves when MH vaccination is delayed until after calves have received a dose of ML BHV-1 vaccine.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research