Brussels, Belgium
Brussels, Belgium

Time filter

Source Type

De jong A.,EASSA Study Group | De jong A.,Bayer AG | Thomas V.,EASSA Study Group | Thomas V.,MSD Animal Health | And 13 more authors.
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy | Year: 2012

Objectives: To determine the antimicrobial susceptibility of Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter and Enterococcus from cattle, pigs and chickens across the European Union (EU) using uniform methodology. Methods: Intestinal samples (1624) were taken at slaughter across five EU countries. Bacteria were isolated in national laboratories, whilst MICs were determined in a central laboratory for key antimicrobials used in human medicine. Clinical resistance was based on CLSI breakpoints and decreased susceptibility based on European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)/EUCAST epidemiological cut-off values. Results: Isolation rates were high for E. coli (n=1540), low for Salmonella (n=201) and intermediate for Campylobacter (n=940) and Enterococcus (n=786). For E. coli and Salmonella, clinical resistance to newer compounds (cefepime, cefotaxime and ciprofloxacin) was absent or low, but decreased susceptibility was apparent, particularly in chicken strains. Resistance to older compounds (except gentamicin) was variable and higher. Colistin resistance was absent for E. coli, but apparent for Salmonella. For Campylobacter jejuni, ciprofloxacin resistance was markedly prevalent for chickens, whereas clinical resistance and decreased susceptibility to erythromycin was absent or very low. For Campylobacter coli, resistance was notably higher. None of the Enterococcus faecium strains was resistant to linezolid, but some were resistant to ampicillin or vancomycin. Resistance to quinupristin/dalfopristin was frequent. Conclusions: Resistance patterns varied widely depending on bacterial species, antibiotics, hosts and region. Resistance varied among countries, particularly for older antimicrobials, but clinical resistance to newer antibiotics used to treat foodborne disease in humans was generally very low. In the absence of resistance to newer compounds in E. coli and Salmonella, the apparent decreased susceptibility should be monitored. © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.


Moyaert H.,EASSA Study Group | De Jong A.,EASSA Study Group | Simjee S.,EASSA Study Group | Thomas V.,EASSA Study Group
Veterinary Microbiology | Year: 2014

Resistance monitoring programmes are essential to generate data for inclusion in the scientific risk assessment of the potential for transmission of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria or their resistance determinants from food-producing animals to humans. This review compares the technical specifications on monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic Salmonella, Campylobacter and indicator Escherichia coli and Enterococcus as performed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) with veterinary pharmaceutical industry's European Antimicrobial Susceptibility Surveillance in Animals (EASSA) programme. The authors conclude that most of EFSA's recent monitoring recommendations have been covered by EASSA since the start of the latter programme in 1998. The major difference between the two programmes is the classification into 'susceptible' versus 'resistant'. While EFSA categorises all isolates with an MIC value above the epidemiological cut-off value as 'resistant', EASSA differentiates between 'percentage decreased susceptible' and 'percentage clinical resistant' strains by applying both epidemiological cut-off values and clinical breakpoints. Because there is still a need to further improve harmonisation among individual EU Member State activities, Animal Health Industry welcomes EFSA's initiative to further improve the quality of resistance monitoring as it is of utmost importance to apply standardised collection procedures and harmonised susceptibility testing, when monitoring antimicrobial resistance across Europe. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.


PubMed | EASSA Study Group
Type: Journal Article | Journal: The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy | Year: 2012

To determine the antimicrobial susceptibility of Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter and Enterococcus from cattle, pigs and chickens across the European Union (EU) using uniform methodology.Intestinal samples (1624) were taken at slaughter across five EU countries. Bacteria were isolated in national laboratories, whilst MICs were determined in a central laboratory for key antimicrobials used in human medicine. Clinical resistance was based on CLSI breakpoints and decreased susceptibility based on European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)/EUCAST epidemiological cut-off values.Isolation rates were high for E. coli (n=1540), low for Salmonella (n=201) and intermediate for Campylobacter (n=940) and Enterococcus (n=786). For E. coli and Salmonella, clinical resistance to newer compounds (cefepime, cefotaxime and ciprofloxacin) was absent or low, but decreased susceptibility was apparent, particularly in chicken strains. Resistance to older compounds (except gentamicin) was variable and higher. Colistin resistance was absent for E. coli, but apparent for Salmonella. For Campylobacter jejuni, ciprofloxacin resistance was markedly prevalent for chickens, whereas clinical resistance and decreased susceptibility to erythromycin was absent or very low. For Campylobacter coli, resistance was notably higher. None of the Enterococcus faecium strains was resistant to linezolid, but some were resistant to ampicillin or vancomycin. Resistance to quinupristin/dalfopristin was frequent.Resistance patterns varied widely depending on bacterial species, antibiotics, hosts and region. Resistance varied among countries, particularly for older antimicrobials, but clinical resistance to newer antibiotics used to treat foodborne disease in humans was generally very low. In the absence of resistance to newer compounds in E. coli and Salmonella, the apparent decreased susceptibility should be monitored.

Loading EASSA Study Group collaborators
Loading EASSA Study Group collaborators