4.7 Article

Ceftiofur derivatives in serum, uterine tissues, cotyledons, and lochia after fetal membrane retention

期刊

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
卷 89, 期 9, 页码 3431-3438

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72380-3

关键词

retained fetal membrane; ceftiofur

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of the study was to determine concentrations of ceftiofur derivatives after subcutaneous application of ceftiofur hydrochloride in cows with retained fetal membranes. Concentrations of ceftiofur derivatives detected as desfuroylceftiofuracetamide were determined in blood serum, endometrium, caruncles, cotyledons, and lochia during 72 h. After induction of parturition, 2 primiparous and 4 multiparous cows having retained fetal membranes for at least 12 h were studied. All cows received 3 consecutive injections (C1 to C3; 24 h apart) of 1-mg ceftiofur equivalents per kilogram of body weight as ceftiofur hydrochloride sterile suspension. Samples of blood, endometrium, caruncles, cotyledons, and lochia were collected immediately before each injection (0 h) and again at 4, 12, and 24 h after C1, C2, and C3. Blood samples were collected from coccygeal vessels. Caruncles were removed from the uterine lumen by manual extirpation and separated from cotyledons. Endometrial tissue (0.5 g) was collected by using Kenny's biopsy apparatus. For all samples, concentrations of potentially active ceftiofur derivatives were quantified using an HPLC assay. Within 2 h (serum), 4 h (endometrium), and 12 h (caruncles, cotyledons, lochia) after C1 and during the entire study period, mean concentration of ceftiofur derivatives exceeded the reported minimum drug concentrations required to inhibit the growth of 90% of isolates for relevant bacteria such as Escherichia coli, Fusobacterium necrophorum, and Arcanobacterium pyogenes. Only in single samples did concentrations decrease temporarily below the reported minimum drug concentrations required to inhibit the growth of 90% of isolates.

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

4.7
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