Search

The objective of this study was to analyze the effects of immunological suppression of ovarian function and estrus (Improvest®; Zoetis Inc.) on carcass cutting yields and meat quality. A total of 1,080 gilts were allocated by weight and assigned to pens of 27 pigs/pen. Pens were then randomly selected to be managed with or without immunological suppression of ovarian function and estrus (IMP vs. CON). Improvest was administered to each IMP gilt on days 7 and 67 of the study. Pigs were marketed on day 89 ( n  = 8 heaviest gilts per pen), 103 ( n  = 8 next heaviest gilts per pen), and 117 (remaining pigs/pen) of the study. The heaviest 47 to 50 carcasses for each treatment from each marketing group were selected for carcass cutting tests and evaluation of meat quality the day following slaughter (approximately 32-h postmortem). A smaller subset of 18 to 20 pork loins per treatment from each marketing group were selected for meat quality evaluation following 14 d of postmortem storage. Carcasses were fabricated according to institutional meat purchase specifications (IMPS) and meat quality analyses included pH and instrumental color at 32-h postmortem and purge loss, pH, instrumental color, intramuscular fat (IMF), cooking loss, and star probe following 14 d of postmortem storage. Live performance data were analyzed using the pen as the experimental unit, while carcass data were analyzed using the individual carcass as the experimental unit. During the post-second dose period (measured from days 70 to 85), IMP gilts consumed 10.8% more feed ( P  < 0.01) and grew 13.5% faster ( P  < 0.01) compared with CON gilts. Hot carcass weight (HCW), and the weights of many cuts, were significantly influenced by the interaction of Improvest management and marketing group. Therefore, the focus was directed toward primal weights and merchandized cut weights when expressed as a percentage of HCW. When expressed as a percentage of HCW, primal-cut yield and merchandized-cut yield calculations were not different ( P  = 0.33 and P  = 0.65, respectively) between CON and IMP gilts. Meat quality traits did not differ ( P  > 0.05) between CON and IMP gilts, with the exception of instrumental a* at 32-h postmortem which was 0.32 units greater for CON gilts compared with IMP gilts. In summary, managing market gilts with immunological suppression of ovarian function and estrus improves the rate of weight gain through increased feed intake; however, carcass-cutting yields were not significantly changed., Competing Interests: The authors would like to disclose that L. Galina Pantoja, D. Amodie, M.A. Mellencamp, and K.A. Vonnahme were employees of Zoetis Inc., the manufacturer of Improvest, while this study was conducted., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.)

Introduction: Dogs with allergic dermatitis often suffer concurrent skin and ear infections. The objective of this study was to retrospectively quantify the number of systemic and topical antimicrobial transactions in dogs with allergic dermatitis, following administration of oclacitinib or a glucocorticoid, compared to dogs that did not receive a pruritus therapy when there is an initial diagnosis of pyoderma. A secondary objective was to demonstrate that dogs on oclacitinib use fewer antimicrobials and concomitant therapies over time and have improved quality of life., Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study using a large, centralized database to identify canine patients receiving pruritus therapy along with a concurrent diagnosis of pyoderma. For the second objective, 58 client-owned dogs diagnosed with allergic dermatitis were enrolled in a prospective owner and dog quality of life and treatment satisfaction (QoL&TS) study that also evaluated concomitant therapy use over time. In Part A, data consisted of anonymous transaction records from 1,134 hospitals across the United States, representing pyoderma visits between December 2018 and December 2019. Odds ratios comparing the relative odds of having additional antimicrobial agent transactions were calculated, given initial pruritus therapy compared to dogs that did not receive pruritus therapy. Parametric bootstrapping was used to calculate goodness-of-fit statistics. In part B, dogs entered the study on Day 0 and returned for examination on Days 14, 21, 30, and 60. Owner determination of QoL&TS was performed on Days 0, 1, 3, 14, 21, 30, and 60. On Days 0, 14, 21, and 60, a veterinarian assessed concomitant therapies and dermatitis severity scoring. Least Squares Means and Standard Errors for QoL&TS, and Dermatitis Vet VAS (Visual Analog Scale) Scores were calculated using a Linear Mixed Model Approach for Repeated Measures (α = 0.05). The percent reduction in therapies was also calculated., Results: Dogs that received oclacitinib (n = 5,132) or a glucocorticoid ( n = 7,024) had reduced odds (OR: 0.8091; p = 0.0002 and OR: 0.7095; p < 0.0001, respectively) of having a follow up antimicrobial drug transaction after initial antimicrobial therapy compared to dogs with no pruritus therapy at the initial visit ( n = 12,997). In part B, oclacitinib demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in QoL&TS scores over time QoL ( p < 0.05). Veterinarian assessment showed a 70% reduction in dermatitis severity over time ( p < 0.05), supporting oclacitinib's anti-inflammatory effects. Oclacitinib therapy was also associated with an 83% reduction in concomitant treatments, including a 100% reduction in systemic antimicrobial therapy over eight weeks., Discussion: Dogs receiving oclacitinib showed no increase in antimicrobial therapy transactions compared to glucocorticoid recipients at the initial pyoderma diagnosis. Having a pruritus therapy at the index pyoderma visit reduced the odds of subsequent antimicrobial transactions. In addition to reducing concomitant therapy usage, oclacitinib improved owner and pet QoL, suggesting a paradigm shift in treatment success that could reshape allergic pruritus therapy recommendations. The study provides empirical evidence of oclacitinib's reduction in antibacterial therapy, supporting its therapeutic value and antimicrobial stewardship., Competing Interests: KM, AH, MR, CB, and DA were employed by Zoetis Inc., (Copyright © 2023 Mwacalimba, Hillier, Rosenbaum, Brennan and Amodie.)

The efficacy of moxidectin canine sustained-release injectable administered at fixed intervals before administration of an oral hookworm challenge was evaluated in 40 laboratory dogs. Groups of eight dogs were treated with the moxidectin sustained-release formulation by SC injection approximately 3, 4, 5, or 6 months before being given oral inoculations with 300 Ancylostoma caninum larvae on Day 0 and 400 Uncinaria stenocephala larvae one day later. Dogs were euthanized 21 days after parasite inoculations. Fecal samples and the intestinal contents collected at necropsy from each dog were examined for hookworms. Fecal egg count reductions based on geometric means relative to controls were 99.2% (3 months) to 81.2% (6 months). The reduction in A. caninum worm recoveries at 3, 4, 5, and 6 months based on geometric means were 94.7%, 90.3%, 82.0%, and 60.2%, respectively. The mean reductions in U. stenocephala worm counts at these intervals were 94.6%, 85.3%, 71.6%, and 48.2%,respectively.

Four studies were conducted to determine the efficacy of a 1% lambdacyhalothrin pour-on (Saber Pour-on, Schering-Plough Animal Health) for control of sucking lice (Linognathus vituli, Haematopinus eurysternus, Solenopotes capillatus) and biting lice (Damalinia bovis) on beef cattle. Seventy-four mixed-breed cattle naturally infested with one or more species of lice at locations in Wisconsin, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and North Dakota were included in the study. Pretreatment lice samples were taken and identified by genus with the exception that sucking lice were not identified by genus at the North Dakota site. In January or February, half of the cattle at each location received a single application of 1% lambdacyhalothrin pour-on at 10 ml per head for cattle weighing less than 273 kg (600 lb) or 15 ml per head for cattle weighing 273 kg or more. The other cattle at each site served as untreated controls. Lice on designated body areas were counted 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks after treatment, and the sum of all lice observed on each counting area was reported for each animal. The collective efficacy 6 weeks after treatment against three species of sucking lice (L. vituli, H. eurysternus, S. capillatus) was 88.4% at the Wisconsin site, 92.0% at the North Dakota site, and 100% at the Nebraska and Oklahoma sites. The 1% lambdacyhalothrin pour-on eliminated all biting lice within 2 weeks after treatment, and no biting lice were detected 8 weeks after treatment. A single treatment of 1% lambdacyhalothrin pour-on administered when lice populations were highest (January or February) provided effective season-long control of both biting and sucking lice on cattle.

Two topically applied spot-on products used for flea and tick control on dogs, 65% permethrin (Defend EXspot Treatment for Dogs, Schering-Plough Animal Health Corp., Union, NJ) and selamectin (Revolution [United States] or Stronghold [Europe], Pfizer Animal Health, New York, NY), were evaluated for repellency and efficacy against Ixodes ricinus, the primary vector of Lyme disease in Europe. Eighteen dogs were evenly and randomly allocated to the following treatments: 1) 65% permethrin, 2) selamectin, 3) untreated control. Dogs were treated by topical application of the assigned product in accordance with product label directions on Day 0. At 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35 days after treatment, each dog was exposed for 2 hours to 50 unfed, adult ticks in a cage with a carpet that covered approximately 70% of the floor area. After the exposure period, dogs were removed from the cages and live and dead ticks were counted on the dogs and in the cages. The number of live ticks recovered was reduced by 90.3% to 99.5% for dogs treated with 65% permethrin (P <.0001 versus controls and selamectin), compared with 10.9% to 31.1% for dogs treated with selamectin (P >.05 versus controls). The repellency of 65% permethrin was 63.4% to 80.2% against I. ricinus ticks (P <.0001 versus controls, P <.0007 versus selamectin), compared with 0% to 10.9% repellency for selamectin (P >.05 versus controls).