The Veterinary record · 2021
Treatment of bovine respiratory disease with a single administration of tulathromycin and ketoprofen.
СтатьяRandomized Controlled Trial, VeterinaryНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Koster Jenne, Tena Jezaniah-Kira, Stegemann Michael R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The therapeutic strategy of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) often involves a combination of an antibiotic with an anti-inflammatory agent. Aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of a new combination product containing tulathromycin and ketoprofen for the treatment of naturally occurring BRD.
METHODS: Two hundred and eighty animals were randomized upon diagnosis of BRD. One hundred forty animals each were treated once subcutaneously with tulathromycin-ketoprofen or tulathromycin. Rectal temperature of each animal was measured at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 h post-treatment. Individual respiration and depression scores were determined at 6 h post-treatment. Daily rectal temperature, respiration and depression scores were recorded from day 2 to 14 and on day 21.
RESULTS: The tulathromycin-ketoprofen and tulathromycin treatment group demonstrated a treatment success rate of 94.2% and 95.0%, respectively and a relapse rate of 3.8% and 4.0%, respectively. Tulathromycin-ketoprofen demonstrated superior pyrexia control compared to tulathromycin within the first 24 h following treatment. Tulathromycin-ketoprofen-treated animals demonstrated faster improvement of their clinical symptoms (respiration and depression score).
CONCLUSION: Efficacy of tulathromycin-ketoprofen for the treatment of BRD was non-inferior to tulathromycin. The combination product clearly exhibited more pronounced fever control than tulathromycin which is considered beneficial for animal welfare.
METHODS: Two hundred and eighty animals were randomized upon diagnosis of BRD. One hundred forty animals each were treated once subcutaneously with tulathromycin-ketoprofen or tulathromycin. Rectal temperature of each animal was measured at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 h post-treatment. Individual respiration and depression scores were determined at 6 h post-treatment. Daily rectal temperature, respiration and depression scores were recorded from day 2 to 14 and on day 21.
RESULTS: The tulathromycin-ketoprofen and tulathromycin treatment group demonstrated a treatment success rate of 94.2% and 95.0%, respectively and a relapse rate of 3.8% and 4.0%, respectively. Tulathromycin-ketoprofen demonstrated superior pyrexia control compared to tulathromycin within the first 24 h following treatment. Tulathromycin-ketoprofen-treated animals demonstrated faster improvement of their clinical symptoms (respiration and depression score).
CONCLUSION: Efficacy of tulathromycin-ketoprofen for the treatment of BRD was non-inferior to tulathromycin. The combination product clearly exhibited more pronounced fever control than tulathromycin which is considered beneficial for animal welfare.