Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance profile of Campylobacter spp. isolated from conventional and antimicrobial-free swine production systems from different U.S. regions.
We conducted a study to compare the prevalence and antimicrobial resistance profile of Campylobacter isolated from 34 farm-slaughter pair cohorts of pigs raised in conventional and antimicrobial-free (ABF) production systems. Isolates originated from four different states of two geographic regions (region 1--Ohio and Michigan; region 2--Wisconsin and Iowa). A total of 838 fecal and 1173 carcass samples were examined. Campylobacter isolates were speciated using multiplex polymerase chain reaction targeting ceuE and hipO genes. The minimum inhibitory concentration was determined using agar dilution to a panel of six antimicrobials: chloramphenicol, erythromycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, nalidixic acid, and tetracycline. Campylobacter spp. was isolated from 472 of 838 pigs (56.3%). Campylobacter prevalence did not vary significantly based on production system (conventional [58.9%] and ABF [53.7%], odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-2.6, p = 0.24) or geographic region (region 1 [54.1%] and region 2 [58.2%], OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.6-1.9, p = 0.92). At slaughter plant, Campylobacter prevalence varied based on processing stages (19.4% at pre-evisceration, 25.3% at postevisceration, and 3.2% at postchill). Resistance was common to tetracycline (64.5%), erythromycin (47.9%), and nalidixic acid (23.5%). Campylobacter isolates from conventional production systems were more likely to be erythromycin resistant than from ABF (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.2, p = 0.01). The proportion of ciprofloxacin-resistant Campylobacter coli isolates were 3.7% and 1.2% from ABF and conventional production systems, respectively. Thirty-seven out of 1257 C. coli (2.9%) were resistant to both erythromycin and ciprofloxacin, drugs of choice for treatment of invasive human campylobacteriosis. The finding of ciprofloxacin resistance, particularly from ABF herds, has significant implications on the potential role of risk factors other than mere antimicrobial use for production purposes.
Food and Drug Administration, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Office of Research, Laurel, Maryland, USA.
Daniel A
DA
Tadesse
Peter B
PB
Bahnson
Julie A
JA
Funk
Siddhartha
S
Thakur
William E Morgan
WE
Morrow
Thomas
T
Wittum
Fred
F
DeGraves
Paivi
P
Rajala-Schultz
Wondwossen A
WA
Gebreyes
D000003:Abattoirs; D000822:Animal Husbandry; D000818:Animals; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000494:pharmacology*; D002167:Campylobacter / Q000145:classification / Q000187:drug effects* / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D002169:Campylobacter Infections / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000382:microbiology / Q000662:veterinary*; D015331:Cohort Studies; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D024881:Drug Resistance, Bacterial; D005243:Feces / Q000382:microbiology; D006114:Great Lakes Region / Q000453:epidemiology; D008826:Microbial Sensitivity Tests / Q000662:veterinary; D015146:Midwestern United States / Q000453:epidemiology; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction; D015995:Prevalence; D012307:Risk Factors; D013552:Swine; D013553:Swine Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000382:microbiology*
D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents