Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T12:19:13.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance in faecal Escherichia coli isolated from pigfarmers and abattoir workers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

R. Nijsten ,
N. London ,
A. Van Den Bogaard  and
E. Stobberingh
R. Nijsten
Affiliation:
Department of Medieval Microbiology, University of Limburg, P. Debyelaan 25, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
N. London
Affiliation:
Department of Medieval Microbiology, University of Limburg, P. Debyelaan 25, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
A. Van Den Bogaard
Affiliation:
Department of Medieval Microbiology, University of Limburg, P. Debyelaan 25, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
E. Stobberingh
Affiliation:
Department of Medieval Microbiology, University of Limburg, P. Debyelaan 25, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Faecal samples collected from three populations of healthy adult volunteers (290 pigfarmers, 316 abattoir workers, 160 (sub)urban residents) living in the south of The Netherlands were analysed for the prevalence and degree of antibiotic resistance of Escherichia coli.

Significant differences in prevalence of resistance to amoxicillin, neomycin, oxytetracycline, sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim were observed. The pig-farmers showed the highest percentages of resistance and the (sub)urban residents the lowest. In contrast no significant differences in high degrees of resistance were observed, except for neomycin.

Although both pigfarmers and abattoir workers have regular contact with pigs differences in prevalences of resistance were observed. However, because abattoir workers with intensive and less intensive pig(carcass) contact did not show significant differences, this is probably not the only important source of resistant E. coli in pigfarmers.

The high antibiotic use by pigfarmers (5%) and abattoir workers (8%) than by (sub)urban residents (0%) did not result in significantly different resistance percentages.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 113 , Issue 1 , August 1994 , pp. 45 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

References

REFERENCES

1.Neu, HC. The emergence of bacterial resistance and its influence on emperic therapy. Rev Infect Dis 1983; 5: Suppl. S9–S20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Datta, N. Drug resistance and R factors in the bowel bacteria of London patients before and after admission to hospital. B M J 1969; 2: 407–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Lester, SC. Pilar, del M, Wang, F, Perez, Schael I, Jiang, H, O'Brien, TF. The carriage of Esrherichia coli resistant to antimicrobial agents by healthy children in Boston, in Caracas. Venezuela, and in Qin Pu. China. N Engl J Med 1990; 323: 285–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kling, P, Ostensson, R. Granstrom, S, Burman, L. A 7-year survey of drug resistance in aerobic and anaerobic fecal bacteria of surgical inpatients: clinical relevance and relation to local antibiotic consumption. Scand J Infect Dis 1989; 21: 589–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Ahart, JG. Burton, GC. Blenden, DC. The influence of antimicrobial agents on the percentage of tetracyeline resistant bacteria in faeces of humans and animals. J Appl Bacteriol 1978; 44: 183–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.DuPont, HL. Use of quinolones in the treatment of gastrointestinal infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991; 10: 325–9.Google Scholar
7.Midtvedt, T. The influence of quinolones on the faecal flora. Scand J Infect Dis 1990; Suppl. 68: 14–8.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Seydel, JK, Wempe, E. Bacterial growth kinetics of E. coli in the presence of various trimethoprim derivates alone and in combination with sulfonamides. Chemother 1980: 26: 361–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Bonten, M. Stobberingh, E, Philips, J, Houben, A. High prevalence of antibiotic resistant Escherichia coli in faecal samples of students in the south-east of The Netherlands. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26: 585–92.Google Scholar
10.Bonten, M, Stobberingh, E, Philips, J. Houben, A. Antibiotic resistance of Escherichia coli in fecal samples of healthy people in two different areas in an industrialized country. Infection 1992; 20: 258–62.Google Scholar
11.Degener, JE, Hooft van, IMS. Stiphout van, WAHJ, Luchmun, R. Veranderde gevoeligheid van Escherichia coli voor antibiotica in de bevolking. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 1990; 47: 2296–9.Google Scholar
12.Levy, SB, Marshall, B, Schluederberg, S, Rowse, D, Davies, J. High frequency of antimicrobial resistance in human fecal flora. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1988; 32: 1801–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Linton, KB, Lee, PA, Richmond, MH, Gillespie, WA, Rowland, AJ, Baker, VN. Antibiotic resistance and transmissible R-factors in the intestinal coliform flora of healthy adults and children in an urban and rural community. J Hyg 1972; 70: 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Levy, SB, Fitzgerald, GB, Macone, AB. Changes in intestinal flora of farm personnel after introduction of a tetracycline-supplemented feed on a farm. N Engl J Med 1976; 295: 583–8.Google Scholar
15.Ojeniyi, AA. Direct transmission of Escherichia coli from poultry to humans. Epidemiol Infect 1989; 103: 513–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Levy, SB, Fitzgerald, GB, Macone, B. Spread of antibiotic-resistant plasmids from chicken to chicken and from chicken to man. Nature 1976; 260: 40–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Levy, SB. Emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in the intestinal flora of farm inhabitants. J Infect Dis 1978; 137: 688–90.Google Scholar
18.Linton, AH, Howe, K. Bennet, PM, Richmond, MH. The colonisation of the human gut by antibiotic resistant Escherichia coli from chickens. J Appl Bacteriol 1977; 43: 465–9.Google Scholar
19.Linton, AH, Handley, B, Osborne, AD, Shaw, BG, Roberts, TA, Hudson, WR. Contamination of pig carcasses at two abattoirs by Escherichia coli with special reference to O-serotypes and antibiotic resistance. J Appl Bacteriol 1976; 41: 89–110.Google Scholar
20.Shooter, RA, Rousseau, SA, Cooke, EM, Breaden, AL. Animal sources of common serotypes of Esherichia coli in the food of hospital patients. Lancet 1970: 226–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Howe, K, Linton, AH, Osborne, AD. An investigation of calf carcass contamination by Escherichia coli from the gut contents at slaughter. J Appl Bacteriol 1976; 41: 37–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Wray, C. Some aspects of the occurrence of resistant bacteria in the normal animal flora. J Antimicrob Chemother 1986: Suppl. C 18: 141–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Nijsten, R. London, N, Bogaard van den, A, Stobberingh, E. Antibiotic resistance of Enterobacteriaceae isolated from the faecal flora of fattening pigs. Vet Quart 1993: 15: 152–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Society of American Bacteriologists. Manual of microbiological methods. New York: McGraw Hill, 1957.Google Scholar
25. Nota Beleidsgroep ‘Veterinaire Apotheek’. Veternair antibioticum beleid. Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij voor Diergeneeskunde. 1992.Google Scholar
26.Ozanne, G, Bedard, P, Ducic, S, Panisset, JC. Antibiotic multiresistance among coliforms isolated from the gut of swine and abattoir workers: evidence of transfer from animal to man. Can J Publ Hlth 1987; 78: 340–4.Google ScholarPubMed
27.Saida, K, Ike, Y, Mitsuhashi, S. Drug resistance and R plasmids of Escherichia coli strains isolated from pigs, slaughterers and breeders of pigs in Japan. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1981; 19: 1032–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Preller, L, Vogelzang, P. Gezondheid varkenshouder aan risico's blootgesteld. Stichting Gezondheidsdienst voor Dieren in Zuid-Nederland. Boxtel/Heythuysen. The Netherlands. 1993. Rapportnr. 93.001.Google Scholar