Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39020377›Full record

ArticleActa veterinaria Scandinavica2024

Antimicrobial resistance among indicator Enterococcus faecium and Escherichia coli in Swedish pig farms.

Valeriia Ladyhina, Susanna Sternberg-Lewerin, Linus Andersson, Elisabeth Rajala

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta veterinaria Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Valeriia LadyhinaDivision of Bacteriology and Food Safety, Department of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden. Valeriia.Ladyhina@slu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3306-2905
Susanna Sternberg-LewerinDivision of Bacteriology and Food Safety, Department of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Linus AnderssonDepartment of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology (IMBIM), Uppsala University, P.O. Box 582, 751 23, Uppsala, Sweden.
Elisabeth RajalaDivision of Bacteriology and Food Safety, Department of Animal Biosciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring the use of antimicrobials and the emergence of resistance in animals and people is important for the control of antimicrobial resistance, and for establishing sustainable and effective disease management practices. In this study, we used Enterococcus spp. and Escherichia coli as indicator species to investigate antimicrobial susceptibility patterns and how these change over time, on ten Swedish pig farms. Indoor environmental sock sampling was performed once a month during the entire production cycle of one batch of pigs on each farm, resulting in 60 samples collected in total. Selective culture for E. coli and Enterococcus spp. resulted in 122 isolates of E. coli, 74 isolates of E. faecium, but no isolates of E. faecalis. Microdilution was used to determine minimum inhibitory concentrations for twelve antimicrobial substances in E. coli and fifteen substances in E. faecium. The overall prevalence of resistance was low. Among the E. coli isolates, the proportions non-wild type (resistant, NWT) isolates were as follows: azithromycin and amikacin 1% (n = 1), trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole 2% (n = 3), ampicillin 6% (n = 7) and tetracycline 9% (n = 11). Among the E. faecium isolates, the NWT proportions were: teicoplanin, linezolid and gentamicin 1% (n = 1), daptomycin 3% (n = 2), erythromycin 26% (n = 19), tetracycline 27% (n = 20), quinupristin/dalfopristin 58% (n = 42). The resistance patterns differed between the farms, likely due to different antimicrobial use, biosecurity measures and source of the animals. The NWT prevalence among E. coli decreased over time, whereas no similar trend could be observed in E. faecium. The results of the current study illustrate the complex factors affecting the antimicrobial resistance patterns observed on each farm, indicating that specific practices and risk factors have an impact on the prevalence and type of antimicrobial resistance. Further studies of the farm environments in combination with antimicrobial use and other risk factor data are needed to elucidate the multifaceted drivers of antimicrobial resistance development on livestock farms.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug Resistance, BacterialEnterococcus faeciumEscherichia coliMicrobial Sensitivity TestsSwine DiseasesAnimal HusbandryAnimalsEscherichia coli InfectionsFarmsGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsPrevalenceSwedenSwineAnti-Bacterial AgentsAMREnvironmental samplingIndicator bacteriaPigSurveillanceSwine

Identifiers

PMID39020377
PMCPMC11256653

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.