4.4 Article

Comparison of antimicrobial resistance of Campylobacter jejuni isolated from humans, chickens, raw milk, and environmental water in Quebec

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
卷 70, 期 3, 页码 729-735

出版社

INT ASSOC FOOD PROTECTION
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-70.3.729

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares the occurrence of antimicrobial resistance to erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline among 384 Campylobacter jejuni isolates from humans (245), fresh whole retail chickens (56), raw milk (33), and environmental water (41) collected between 2000 and 2003 in Quebec, Canada. Resistance to ciprofloxacin was significantly more frequent in human isolates acquired abroad than in those acquired locally (50 versus 5.9%; P < 0.001); ciprofloxacin resistance was almost absent in water, chicken, and raw milk isolates. In contrast, resistance to erythromycin was significantly more common in chicken than in locally acquired human isolates (16 versus 3.0%, respectively; P < 0.001); no erythromycin resistance was found among water, raw milk, and human isolates acquired abroad. Resistance to tetracycline was significantly more common in chicken and human isolates acquired locally (58.9 and 45.8%, respectively) than in raw milk and water isolates (9.1 and 7.3%, respectively, P < 0.001). Tetracycline resistance was also observed in 44.4% of human isolates acquired abroad. No human isolate was resistant to both ciprofloxacin and erythromycin, but one chicken isolate was resistant to all three antimicrobial agents. Our results suggest that from 2000 to 2003 in Quebec, antimicrobial resistance remained stable among locally acquired C. jejuni human clinical isolates and might even have decreased. However, the high erythromycin resistance rate observed among chicken isolates is concerning because of the risk of transmission of such isolates to humans. Additional studies are needed to monitor trends in antimicrobial resistance among food, environment, and human C. jejuni isolates as well as antibiotic use in animals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据