Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32013971›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2020

Phenotypic antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli strains isolated from swine husbandries in North Western Germany - temporal patterns in samples from laboratory practice from 2006 to 2017.

C Moennighoff, N Thomas, F Nienhaus, M Hartmann, A Menrath, J Merkel, H Detlefsen, L Kreienbrock, I Hennig-Pauka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antimicrobial resistance prevalence inApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C MoennighoffField Station for Epidemiology in Bakum, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
N ThomasDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
F NienhausField Station for Epidemiology in Bakum, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
M HartmannDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
A MenrathField Station for Epidemiology in Bakum, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
J MerkelDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Institute for Microbiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
H DetlefsenField Station for Epidemiology in Bakum, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
L KreienbrockDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health at the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany.
I Hennig-PaukaField Station for Epidemiology in Bakum, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany. Isabel.Hennig-Pauka@tiho-hannover.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3994-5979
University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince 2011, antibiotic usage has decreased continuously in livestock in Germany. Whether this is accompanied by a reduction in bacterial antimicrobial resistance has not been proven so far. In this study 3054 Escherichia coli (E. coli) isolates from pigs which had suffered from disease on 2161 farms in North Western Germany were evaluated retrospectively from 2006 to 2017 for trends in their antimicrobial resistance pattern. Data were substantially related to the "pre-reduction period" and were therefore suggested as a basis for this task. Minimal inhibitory concentrations for selected antimicrobial substances were evaluated for E. coli strains isolated from different organs of diseased swine sampled for routine diagnostic. In total, 81% of E. coli were isolated from faeces or the gastrointestinal tract, 11% from the genito-urinary tract and 8% from other organs. Susceptibility testing and classification of isolates in accordance with clinical cut-offs followed the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). If no clinical cut-offs were available for the respective combination of species, substance and organ, other published clinical cut-offs were used.

resultsDifferences in susceptibility patterns between isolates from the gastrointestinal and genito-urinary tract were found for most substances. Isolates from the genito-urinary tract were less frequently resistant to ampicillin, apramycin, colistin, neomycin, spectinomycin and tetracycline and more frequently resistant to enrofloxacin and florfenicol. A multifactorial logistic regression model revealed time-dependent decreases in frequency of resistant isolates for neomycin, spectinomycin and tetracycline. For colistin, the highest percentage of resistant isolates with 16.0% was found in 2015 followed by a decrease to the level of 2009-2010 in 2017. A decrease in frequencies of ampicillin-resistant isolates was dependent on the age-group and time period. Irrespective of the year, less than 15% E. coli isolates were resistant to apramycin, cephalosporins, colistin, enrofloxacin, florfenicol, gentamicin and neomycin.

conclusionAn overall time-dependent decrease in the percentage of resistant E. coli isolates was found for some substances. These data from diseased animals indicate an impact of a general reduction in antibiotic usage on development of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in the field and can support the decision-making of swine practitioners for treatment options in swine.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsFecesGastrointestinal TractGermanyMicrobial Sensitivity TestsRetrospective StudiesSwineSwine DiseasesUrogenital SystemAnti-Bacterial AgentsEpidemiologyMinimal inhibitory concentrationPig productionRoutine data

Identifiers

PMID32013971
PMCPMC6998819
OpenAlexW3009236057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.