Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32109782›Full record

SynthesisPreventive veterinary medicine2020

The effect of tylosin on antimicrobial resistance in beef cattle enteric bacteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Casey L Cazer, Erin R B Eldermire, Guillaume Lhermie, Sarah A Murray, H Morgan Scott, Yrjö T Gröhn

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Preventive veterinary medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Tylosin Removal Under PbAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Transcriptome ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Comparison ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Antimicrobial Susceptibility of CommensalAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Casey L CazerDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. Electronic address: clc248@cornell.edu.
Erin R B EldermireFlower-Sprecher Veterinary Library, Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine, USA. Electronic address: erb29@cornell.edu.
Guillaume LhermieDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. Electronic address: gl467@cornell.edu.
Sarah A MurrayDepartment of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine, USA. Electronic address: smurray@cvm.tamu.edu.
H Morgan ScottDepartment of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine, USA. Electronic address: hmscott@cvm.tamu.edu.
Yrjö T GröhnDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. Electronic address: ytg1@cornell.edu.
Cornell University · USNew York State College of Veterinary Medicine · US

Funding

Graduate Training Program in Comparative MedicineT32OD011000 · OD · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI Amanda Marjorie DE MESTRE · 2012 to 2026
$5.7M
NIH HHS T32 OD011000
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTylosin is a commonly used in-feed antimicrobial and is approved in several countries to reduce the incidence of liver abscesses in beef cattle. Macrolides are critically important antimicrobials in human health and used to treat some foodborne bacterial diseases, such as Campylobacter jejuni and Salmonella. Feeding tylosin could select for resistant enteric bacteria in cattle, which could contaminate beef products at slaughter and potentially cause foodborne illness. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of feeding tylosin to cattle on phenotypic and genotypic resistance in several potential zoonotic enteric bacteria: Enterococcus species, Escherichia coli, Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica, and Campylobacter species. This review was registered with PROSPERO (#CRD42018085949).

resultsEleven databases were searched for primary research studies that fed tylosin at approved doses to feedlot cattle and tested bacteria of interest for phenotypic or genotypic resistance. We screened 1,626 citations and identified 13 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Enterococcus species were tested in seven studies, Escherichia coli was isolated in five studies, three studies reported on Salmonella, and two studies reported on Campylobacter species. Most studies relied on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing and seven also reported resistance gene testing. A random-effects meta-analyses of erythromycin-resistant enterococci from four studies had significant residual heterogeneity. Only two studies were available for a meta-analysis of tylosin-resistant enterococci. A semi-quantitative analysis demonstrated an increase in macrolide-resistant enterococci after long durations of tylosin administration (>100 days). Semi-quantitative analyses of other bacteria-antimicrobial combinations revealed mixed results, but many comparisons found no effect of tylosin administration. However, about half of these no-effect comparisons did not record the cumulative days of tylosin administration or the time since the last dose.

conclusionsWhen fed at approved dosages for typical durations, tylosin increases the proportion of macrolide-resistant enterococci in the cattle gastrointestinal tract, which could pose a zoonotic risk to human beef consumers. Feeding tylosin for short durations may mitigate the impact on macrolide-resistant enterococci and further studies are encouraged to determine the effect of minimizing or eliminating tylosin use in beef cattle. There may also be an impact on other bacteria and other antimicrobial resistances but additional details or data are needed to strengthen these comparisons. We encourage authors of antimicrobial-resistance studies to follow reporting guidelines and publish details of all comparisons to strengthen future meta-analyses.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCampylobacterCattleEnterococcusEscherichia coliFemaleGastrointestinal MicrobiomeMaleSalmonellaTylosinAnti-Bacterial AgentsTylosinAntimicrobial resistanceBeef cattleEnterococcusFood-borne pathogensSystematic reviewTylosin

Identifiers

PMID32109782
PMCPMC7197392
OpenAlexW3008822404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.