4.7 Article

Noninferiority trial comparing a first-generation cephalosporin with a third-generation cephalosporin in the treatment of nonsevere clinical mastitis in dairy cows

Journal

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
Volume 96, Issue 10, Pages 6763-6774

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2013-6713

Keywords

mastitis; cephapirin; clinical trial; noninferiority

Funding

  1. New York State
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to evaluate the noninferiority of 2 intramammary treatments for nonsevere clinical mastitis. The 2 treatments were a first-generation cephalosporin (cephapirin sodium, 2 treatments 12 h apart) and a third-generation cephalosporin (ceftiofur hydrochloride, treatments once a day for 5 d). A total of 296 cases on 7 farms met the enrollment criteria for the study. Streptococcus dysgalactiae was the most common bacterial species identified in milk samples from cows with mild to moderate clinical mastitis, followed by Escherichia coli, other esculin-positive cocci, Streptococcus uberis, and Klebsiella spp. Treatment was randomly allocated as either cephapirin sodium or ceftiofur hydrochloride via intramammary infusion according to label standards. Bacteriological cure was defined based on 2 posttreatment milk samples taken at 10 and 17 d after enrollment. Noninferiority of cephapirin relative to ceftiofur was shown for bacteriological cure of gram-positive cases and for clinical cure of all cases. Ceftiofur showed a significantly higher bacteriological cure in gram-negative cases. Treatments showed no significant difference in bacteriological cure of all cases and in time to exit from the study, where the absence of a difference does not imply noninferiority. Based on the findings from this study, farm-specific treatment protocols that differ for gram-positive and gram-negative cased may be developed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available