Suchergebnisse

The definition of antibiotic resistance in bacteria differs if it is seen from the viewpoint of the bacteriologist and the epidemiologist, or of the clinician and the pharmacologist. The standardization by the European Union Committee on antimicrobial susceptibility testing (EUCAST) led to more accurate definitions. This committee defined critical concentrations based on pharmacological approaches and clinical outcomes, and on the variability of exposure of the treated subjects. In France, the values used for veterinary antibiograms are based on epidemiological data. New funding is necessary to move to the next stage and use all available data to define clinical resistance in veterinary medicine. ; Les définitions de la résistance des bactéries aux antibiotiques dépendent des points de vue du bactériologiste et de l'épidémiologiste ou du clinicien et du pharmacologue. Les travaux de standardisation du comité de l'Union Européenne des tests de sensibilité aux antimicrobiens (EUCAST) les ont rendues plus précises. Aujourd'hui, ce comité définit des concentrations critiques pour les catégories cliniques de résistance, en intégrant les approches pharmacologiques et les résultats cliniques et en tenant compte de la variabilité de l'exposition des sujets traités. En France, la définition retenue pour les antibiogrammes vétérinaires est uniquement de nature épidémiologique. Une mobilisation de moyens est nécessaire pour passer au stade suivant et intégrer l'ensemble des informations dans la définition de la résistance clinique applicable à la médecine vétérinaire.

Afin de contribuer à préserver l'efficacité des traitements antibiotiques pour l'Homme, l'Union européenne a mis en place dès 2003 un programme de surveillance de l'antibiorésistance dans le cadre de sa politique de lutte contre les zoonoses. Cette politique repose sur de précédentes initiatives scientifiques, nationales ou internationales, ayant vu le jour progressivement dès la mise en évidence dans les années 1960 du risque pour la santé publique de l'apparition de bactéries résistantes suite àdes usages non thérapeutiques d'antibiotiques. A partir de 2007, l'Autorité européenne de sécurité alimentaire (EFSA) a produit plusieurs documents permettant d'harmoniser les méthodes d'échantillonnage, de détermination des phénotypes de résistance, de collecte et d'analyse des données au niveau européen. Les espèces bactériennes principalement surveillées sont celles responsables de zoonoses (Campylobacter et Salmonella),mais la surveillance s'est aussi étendue à des bactéries dites indicatrices comme Escherichia coli et les entérocoques. Fort de cette expérience, le dispositif semble maintenant se diriger vers une plus grande précision des données épidémiologiques collectées et une augmentation du nombre de couples espèce bactérienne-espèce animale surveillés afin de mieux évaluer le risque pour la population de contracter des bactéries résistantes aux antibiotiques via son alimentation.

Afin de contribuer à préserver l'efficacité des traitements antibiotiques pour l'Homme, l'Union européenne a mis en place dès 2003 un programme de surveillance de l'antibiorésistance dans le cadre de sa politique de lutte contre les zoonoses. Cette politique repose sur de précédentes initiatives scientifiques, nationales ou internationales, ayant vu le jour progressivement dès la mise en évidence dans les années 1960 du risque pour la santé publique de l'apparition de bactéries résistantes suite àdes usages non thérapeutiques d'antibiotiques. A partir de 2007, l'Autorité européenne de sécurité alimentaire (EFSA) a produit plusieurs documents permettant d'harmoniser les méthodes d'échantillonnage, de détermination des phénotypes de résistance, de collecte et d'analyse des données au niveau européen. Les espèces bactériennes principalement surveillées sont celles responsables de zoonoses (Campylobacter et Salmonella),mais la surveillance s'est aussi étendue à des bactéries dites indicatrices comme Escherichia coli et les entérocoques. Fort de cette expérience, le dispositif semble maintenant se diriger vers une plus grande précision des données épidémiologiques collectées et une augmentation du nombre de couples espèce bactérienne-espèce animale surveillés afin de mieux évaluer le risque pour la population de contracter des bactéries résistantes aux antibiotiques via son alimentation.

International audience ; A proficiency test for the determination of nitrofuran metabolites in shrimp tissue was organised in the first half-year 2003. This test was intended to allow the participants to test their routine method and to assess their competence on this specific analysis. The participation to this proficiency test was proposed to all the National Reference Laboratories (NRLs) of the European Union (EU) in charge of the analysis of nitrofurans, to Official Laboratories of Candidate Countries for entry in EU and to some countries exporting food in EU. The participants (20) analysed nitrofuran metabolites in 8 random coded frozen samples including 3 blank samples. All participants performed a confirmatory method using liquid chromatography /mass spectrometry to detect total nitrofuran metabolite residues. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis of the results were investigated. Qualitatively, 16 laboratories over 20 gave correct interpretation of the results in term of compliant / no compliant sample. Quantitatively, laboratory performance was evaluated by calculating the z-scores.

A proficiency test for the determination of nitrofuran metabolites in shrimp tissue was organized in the first half of 2003. This test was intended to allow the participants to use their routine method and to assess their competence on this specific analysis. The participation in this proficiency test was offered to all the National Reference Laboratories (NRLs) of the European Union (EU) in charge of the analysis of nitrofurans, to Official Laboratories of the then 10 Candidate Countries for entry in EU and to some countries exporting food to the EU. The participants (20) analysed nitrofuran metabolites in eight randomly coded frozen samples including three blank samples. All participants performed a confirmatory method using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry to detect total nitrofuran metabolite residues. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses of the results were investigated. Qualitatively, 16 laboratories out of 20 gave the correct interpretation of the results in term of compliant/non-compliant sample. Quantitatively, laboratory performance was evaluated by calculating the z-scores.

International audience ; A proficiency test for the determination of nitrofuran metabolites in shrimp tissue was organised in the first half-year 2003. This test was intended to allow the participants to test their routine method and to assess their competence on this specific analysis. The participation to this proficiency test was proposed to all the National Reference Laboratories (NRLs) of the European Union (EU) in charge of the analysis of nitrofurans, to Official Laboratories of Candidate Countries for entry in EU and to some countries exporting food in EU. The participants (20) analysed nitrofuran metabolites in 8 random coded frozen samples including 3 blank samples. All participants performed a confirmatory method using liquid chromatography /mass spectrometry to detect total nitrofuran metabolite residues. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis of the results were investigated. Qualitatively, 16 laboratories over 20 gave correct interpretation of the results in term of compliant / no compliant sample. Quantitatively, laboratory performance was evaluated by calculating the z-scores.

A proficiency test for the determination of nitrofuran metabolites in shrimp tissue was organized in the first half of 2003. This test was intended to allow the participants to use their routine method and to assess their competence on this specific analysis. The participation in this proficiency test was offered to all the National Reference Laboratories (NRLs) of the European Union (EU) in charge of the analysis of nitrofurans, to Official Laboratories of the then 10 Candidate Countries for entry in EU and to some countries exporting food to the EU. The participants (20) analysed nitrofuran metabolites in eight randomly coded frozen samples including three blank samples. All participants performed a confirmatory method using liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry to detect total nitrofuran metabolite residues. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses of the results were investigated. Qualitatively, 16 laboratories out of 20 gave the correct interpretation of the results in term of compliant/non-compliant sample. Quantitatively, laboratory performance was evaluated by calculating the z-scores.

International audience ; EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase

International audience ; EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase

EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase out most preventive use of antimicrobials and to reduce and refine metaphylaxis by applying recognised alternative measures

EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase out most preventive use of antimicrobials and to reduce and refine metaphylaxis by applying recognised alternative measures