Pub Date : 2022-12-01Epub Date: 2023-01-13DOI: 10.1017/S1466252322000032
C Bernal-Córdoba, R Branco-Lopes, L Latorre-Segura, M de Barros-Abreu, E D Fausak, N Silva-Del-Río
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the scientific literature evaluating the efficacy and comparative efficacy of antimicrobials (AMs) for the treatment of diarrhea in calves. Eligible studies were non- and randomized controlled trials evaluating an AM intervention against a positive and negative control, with at least one of the following outcomes: fecal consistency score, fever, dehydration, appetite, attitude, weight gain, and mortality. Four electronic databases were searched. Titles and abstracts (three reviewers) and full texts (two reviewers) were screened. A total of 2899 studies were retrieved; 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed. Most studies had incomplete reporting of trial design and results. Eight studies compared AMs to a negative control (placebo or no treatment). Among eligible studies, the most common outcomes reported were diarrhea severity (n = 6) and mortality (n = 6). Eligible studies evaluated very different interventions and outcomes; thus, a meta-analysis was not performed. The risk of bias assessment revealed concerns with reporting of key trial features, including disease and outcome definitions. Insufficient evidence is available in the scientific literature to assess the efficacy of AMs in treating calf diarrhea.
{"title":"Use of antimicrobials in the treatment of calf diarrhea: a systematic review.","authors":"C Bernal-Córdoba, R Branco-Lopes, L Latorre-Segura, M de Barros-Abreu, E D Fausak, N Silva-Del-Río","doi":"10.1017/S1466252322000032","DOIUrl":"10.1017/S1466252322000032","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the scientific literature evaluating the efficacy and comparative efficacy of antimicrobials (AMs) for the treatment of diarrhea in calves. Eligible studies were non- and randomized controlled trials evaluating an AM intervention against a positive and negative control, with at least one of the following outcomes: fecal consistency score, fever, dehydration, appetite, attitude, weight gain, and mortality. Four electronic databases were searched. Titles and abstracts (three reviewers) and full texts (two reviewers) were screened. A total of 2899 studies were retrieved; 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed. Most studies had incomplete reporting of trial design and results. Eight studies compared AMs to a negative control (placebo or no treatment). Among eligible studies, the most common outcomes reported were diarrhea severity (<i>n</i> = 6) and mortality (<i>n</i> = 6). Eligible studies evaluated very different interventions and outcomes; thus, a meta-analysis was not performed. The risk of bias assessment revealed concerns with reporting of key trial features, including disease and outcome definitions. Insufficient evidence is available in the scientific literature to assess the efficacy of AMs in treating calf diarrhea.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 2","pages":"101-112"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9217232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1017/s1466252323000014
{"title":"AHR volume 23 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s1466252323000014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1466252323000014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 1","pages":"f1 - f1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43842127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01Epub Date: 2023-01-13DOI: 10.1017/S146625232200007X
Amélie Mugnier, Sylvie Chastant, Faouzi Lyazrhi, Claude Saegerman, Aurélien Grellet
In people and animals, low birth weight (LBW) is recognized as highly predictive of health trajectory from the neonatal period to elderly ages. Regarding the neonatal period, although LBW is recognized as a major risk factor for neonatal mortality, there does not appear to be a clear definition of 'when a birth weight should be considered low' in all species. The aim of this work was to use the scientific literature available to map the various thresholds proposed to define LBW in domestic mammals. Using a standardized methodology, a scoping review was conducted through a literature search in three different bibliographic databases. After a two-step screening of 1729 abstracts and full-text publications by two independent reviewers, eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Selected publications represented six mammalian species (rat, mouse, dog, pig, cow, and rabbit). Birth weight thresholds were identified through six different methods. In addition to the scarcity of scientific literature about the definition of LBW, this scoping review revealed the lack of standardization for the description, evaluation or the pertinence these definitions. Because the health consequences of LBW could be preventable, providing early identification of at-risk neonates, a consensus for the standardized definition of LBW is required.
{"title":"Definition of low birth weight in domestic mammals: a scoping review.","authors":"Amélie Mugnier, Sylvie Chastant, Faouzi Lyazrhi, Claude Saegerman, Aurélien Grellet","doi":"10.1017/S146625232200007X","DOIUrl":"10.1017/S146625232200007X","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In people and animals, low birth weight (LBW) is recognized as highly predictive of health trajectory from the neonatal period to elderly ages. Regarding the neonatal period, although LBW is recognized as a major risk factor for neonatal mortality, there does not appear to be a clear definition of 'when a birth weight should be considered low' in all species. The aim of this work was to use the scientific literature available to map the various thresholds proposed to define LBW in domestic mammals. Using a standardized methodology, a scoping review was conducted through a literature search in three different bibliographic databases. After a two-step screening of 1729 abstracts and full-text publications by two independent reviewers, eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Selected publications represented six mammalian species (rat, mouse, dog, pig, cow, and rabbit). Birth weight thresholds were identified through six different methods. In addition to the scarcity of scientific literature about the definition of LBW, this scoping review revealed the lack of standardization for the description, evaluation or the pertinence these definitions. Because the health consequences of LBW could be preventable, providing early identification of at-risk neonates, a consensus for the standardized definition of LBW is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 2","pages":"157-164"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9217229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1017/S1466252321000165
Parul Puri, Jai Gopal Sharma, Ram Singh
Nutrition demands in aquaculture can be realized through quality aquafeeds as compounded diets that contribute to the growth and health of aquaculture species. Functional additives in feed, notably probiotics, prebiotics, and their admixture synbiotics, have been recently recognized for their biotherapeutic role as immunostimulants capable of conferring disease resistance, stress tolerance, and gastrointestinal health; counteracting the negative effects of anti-nutrients, pathogenic prevalence, and antimicrobials in finfish aquaculture. Formulated diets based on probiotics, prebiotics, and as a supplemental combination for synbiotics can significantly influence fish gut microbiomes, establishing the modalities of microbial dynamics to maximize host-associated benefits. These microbial functional-feed supplements are acclaimed to be biocompatible, biodegradable, and safe for dietary consumption as well as the environment. In fed fish aquaculture, prebiotic appended probiotic diet 'synbiotic' has propounded larger attention for its additional health and nutritional benefits. Synbiotic, prebiotic, and probiotic usage as functional feeds for finfish aquaculture thus provides promising prospects. Developing trends in their intended application are reviewed here forth.
{"title":"Biotherapeutic microbial supplementation for ameliorating fish health: developing trends in probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics use in finfish aquaculture.","authors":"Parul Puri, Jai Gopal Sharma, Ram Singh","doi":"10.1017/S1466252321000165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252321000165","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nutrition demands in aquaculture can be realized through quality aquafeeds as compounded diets that contribute to the growth and health of aquaculture species. Functional additives in feed, notably probiotics, prebiotics, and their admixture synbiotics, have been recently recognized for their biotherapeutic role as immunostimulants capable of conferring disease resistance, stress tolerance, and gastrointestinal health; counteracting the negative effects of anti-nutrients, pathogenic prevalence, and antimicrobials in finfish aquaculture. Formulated diets based on probiotics, prebiotics, and as a supplemental combination for synbiotics can significantly influence fish gut microbiomes, establishing the modalities of microbial dynamics to maximize host-associated benefits. These microbial functional-feed supplements are acclaimed to be biocompatible, biodegradable, and safe for dietary consumption as well as the environment. In fed fish aquaculture, prebiotic appended probiotic diet 'synbiotic' has propounded larger attention for its additional health and nutritional benefits. Synbiotic, prebiotic, and probiotic usage as functional feeds for finfish aquaculture thus provides promising prospects. Developing trends in their intended application are reviewed here forth.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 2","pages":"113-135"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9532058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1017/S1466252322000019
M J López-Martínez, L Franco-Martínez, S Martínez-Subiela, J J Cerón
Sepsis is a complex clinical syndrome triggered by an inflammatory host response to an infection. It is usually complicated to detect and diagnose, and has severe consequences in human and veterinary health, especially when treatment is not started early. Therefore, efforts to detect sepsis accurately are needed. In addition, its proper diagnosis could reduce the misuse of antibiotics, which is essential fighting against antimicrobial resistance. This case is a particular issue in farm animals, as antibiotics have been traditionally given massively, but now they are becoming increasingly restricted. When sepsis is suspected in animals, the most frequently used biomarkers are acute phase proteins such as C-reactive protein, serum amyloid A and haptoglobin, but their concentrations can increase in other inflammatory conditions. In human patients, the most promising biomarkers to detect sepsis are currently procalcitonin and presepsin, and there is a wide range of other biomarkers under study. However, there is little information on the application of these biomarkers in veterinary species. This review aims to describe the general concepts of sepsis and the current knowledge about the biomarkers of sepsis in pigs, horses, and cattle and to discuss possible advances in the field.
{"title":"Biomarkers of sepsis in pigs, horses and cattle: from acute phase proteins to procalcitonin.","authors":"M J López-Martínez, L Franco-Martínez, S Martínez-Subiela, J J Cerón","doi":"10.1017/S1466252322000019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252322000019","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sepsis is a complex clinical syndrome triggered by an inflammatory host response to an infection. It is usually complicated to detect and diagnose, and has severe consequences in human and veterinary health, especially when treatment is not started early. Therefore, efforts to detect sepsis accurately are needed. In addition, its proper diagnosis could reduce the misuse of antibiotics, which is essential fighting against antimicrobial resistance. This case is a particular issue in farm animals, as antibiotics have been traditionally given massively, but now they are becoming increasingly restricted. When sepsis is suspected in animals, the most frequently used biomarkers are acute phase proteins such as C-reactive protein, serum amyloid A and haptoglobin, but their concentrations can increase in other inflammatory conditions. In human patients, the most promising biomarkers to detect sepsis are currently procalcitonin and presepsin, and there is a wide range of other biomarkers under study. However, there is little information on the application of these biomarkers in veterinary species. This review aims to describe the general concepts of sepsis and the current knowledge about the biomarkers of sepsis in pigs, horses, and cattle and to discuss possible advances in the field.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"82-99"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40477623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01Epub Date: 2022-06-15DOI: 10.1017/S1466252321000189
Tácio de Mendonça Lima, Nathania Rodrigues Santiago, Elaine Cristina Ramos Alves, Douglas Siqueira de Almeida Chaves, Marília Berlofa Visacri
Cannabis is used in the treatment of several human conditions; however, its use is still less explored in veterinary medicine. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence of efficacy and safety of the use of cannabis for the treatment of animal disease. A literature search was performed for studies published until 16 March 2021 in five databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported the efficacy or safety of cannabis in the treatment of animal disease were included. The RoB 2 Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. A total of 2427 records were identified, of which six studies fully met the eligibility criteria. RCTs were conducted in dogs with osteoarthritis (n = 4), with epilepsy (n = 1), and with behavioral disorders (n = 1). All studies used cannabidiol (CBD) oil in monotherapy or in combination with other drugs. Studies used CBD at 2 or 2.5 mg kg-1 twice daily (n = 4), orally (n = 5), during 4 or 6 weeks (n = 3), and compared CBD with placebo (n = 5). CBD significantly reduced pain and increased activity in dogs with osteoarthritis (n = 3). Moreover, CBD significantly reduced the frequency of seizures in dogs with epilepsy (n = 1) and the aggressive behavior of dogs (n = 1). Although promising results were identified, studies were heterogeneous and presented risks of bias that required caution in the interpretation of findings. Therefore, there was some evidence to support the use of CBD in dogs with osteoarthritis to reduce pain and increased activity, but limited evidence against epilepsy and behavioral problems. In addition, CBD was well tolerated with mild adverse effects. More RCTs with high quality of evidence are needed, including greater numbers of animal subjects, additional species, and clear readout measures to confirm these findings.
{"title":"Use of cannabis in the treatment of animals: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.","authors":"Tácio de Mendonça Lima, Nathania Rodrigues Santiago, Elaine Cristina Ramos Alves, Douglas Siqueira de Almeida Chaves, Marília Berlofa Visacri","doi":"10.1017/S1466252321000189","DOIUrl":"10.1017/S1466252321000189","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cannabis is used in the treatment of several human conditions; however, its use is still less explored in veterinary medicine. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence of efficacy and safety of the use of cannabis for the treatment of animal disease. A literature search was performed for studies published until 16 March 2021 in five databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported the efficacy or safety of cannabis in the treatment of animal disease were included. The RoB 2 Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. A total of 2427 records were identified, of which six studies fully met the eligibility criteria. RCTs were conducted in dogs with osteoarthritis (<i>n</i> = 4), with epilepsy (<i>n</i> = 1), and with behavioral disorders (<i>n</i> = 1). All studies used cannabidiol (CBD) oil in monotherapy or in combination with other drugs. Studies used CBD at 2 or 2.5 mg kg<sup>-1</sup> twice daily (<i>n</i> = 4), orally (<i>n</i> = 5), during 4 or 6 weeks (<i>n</i> = 3), and compared CBD with placebo (<i>n</i> = 5). CBD significantly reduced pain and increased activity in dogs with osteoarthritis (<i>n</i> = 3). Moreover, CBD significantly reduced the frequency of seizures in dogs with epilepsy (<i>n</i> = 1) and the aggressive behavior of dogs (<i>n</i> = 1). Although promising results were identified, studies were heterogeneous and presented risks of bias that required caution in the interpretation of findings. Therefore, there was some evidence to support the use of CBD in dogs with osteoarthritis to reduce pain and increased activity, but limited evidence against epilepsy and behavioral problems. In addition, CBD was well tolerated with mild adverse effects. More RCTs with high quality of evidence are needed, including greater numbers of animal subjects, additional species, and clear readout measures to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 1","pages":"25-38"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42917462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01Epub Date: 2022-06-09DOI: 10.1017/S1466252321000153
Diana M A Dewsbury, Natalia Cernicchiaro, Michael W Sanderson, Andrea L Dixon, Pius S Ekong
Objective: The objective of this study was to summarize peer-reviewed literature on the prevalence and concentration of non-O157 STEC (O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145) serogroups and virulence genes (stx and eae) in fecal, hide, and carcass samples in pre- and peri-harvest cattle worldwide, using a systematic review of the literature and meta-analyses.
Data synthesis: Seventy articles were eligible for meta-analysis inclusion; data from 65 articles were subjected to random-effects meta-analysis models to yield fecal prevalence estimates. Meta-regression models were built to explore variables contributing to the between-study heterogeneity.
Results: Worldwide pooled non-O157 serogroup, STEC, and EHEC fecal prevalence estimates (95% confidence interval) were 4.7% (3.4-6.3%), 0.7% (0.5-0.8%), and 1.0% (0.8-1.1%), respectively. Fecal prevalence estimates significantly differed by geographic region (P < 0.01) for each outcome classification. Meta-regression analyses identified region, cattle type, and specimen type as factors that contribute to heterogeneity for worldwide fecal prevalence estimates.
Conclusions: The prevalence of these global foodborne pathogens in the cattle reservoir is widespread and highly variable by region. The scarcity of prevalence and concentration data for hide and carcass matrices identifies a large data gap in the literature as these are the closest proxies for potential beef contamination at harvest.
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature on prevalence of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing <i>Escherichia coli</i> serogroups (O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145) and virulence genes in feces, hides, and carcasses of pre- and peri-harvest cattle worldwide.","authors":"Diana M A Dewsbury, Natalia Cernicchiaro, Michael W Sanderson, Andrea L Dixon, Pius S Ekong","doi":"10.1017/S1466252321000153","DOIUrl":"10.1017/S1466252321000153","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to summarize peer-reviewed literature on the prevalence and concentration of non-O157 STEC (O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145) serogroups and virulence genes (<i>stx</i> and <i>eae</i>) in fecal, hide, and carcass samples in pre- and peri-harvest cattle worldwide, using a systematic review of the literature and meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Seventy articles were eligible for meta-analysis inclusion; data from 65 articles were subjected to random-effects meta-analysis models to yield fecal prevalence estimates. Meta-regression models were built to explore variables contributing to the between-study heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Worldwide pooled non-O157 serogroup, STEC, and EHEC fecal prevalence estimates (95% confidence interval) were 4.7% (3.4-6.3%), 0.7% (0.5-0.8%), and 1.0% (0.8-1.1%), respectively. Fecal prevalence estimates significantly differed by geographic region (<i>P</i> < 0.01) for each outcome classification. Meta-regression analyses identified region, cattle type, and specimen type as factors that contribute to heterogeneity for worldwide fecal prevalence estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of these global foodborne pathogens in the cattle reservoir is widespread and highly variable by region. The scarcity of prevalence and concentration data for hide and carcass matrices identifies a large data gap in the literature as these are the closest proxies for potential beef contamination at harvest.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 1","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47528720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01Epub Date: 2022-06-21DOI: 10.1017/S1466252321000190
Anna Cecília Trolesi Reis Borges Costa, Raisa Abreu Bragança Colocho, Carine Rodrigues Pereira, Andrey Pereira Lage, Marcos Bryan Heinemann, Elaine Maria Seles Dorneles
The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the prevalence of leptospirosis among stray and sheltered dogs worldwide. Six databases were searched, which resulted in the retrieval of 476 articles. Sixty articles were selected for analysis according to 10 quality criteria. Among the selected papers, 26 papers [43.4% (26/60)] met five of the 10 quality criteria established, 10 papers [16.7% (10/60)] met three criteria, nine papers [15.0% (9/60)] met four criteria, six papers [10.0% (6/60)] met six criteria, four papers [6.7% (4/60)] met eight criteria, and three papers [5.0% (3/60)] met nine of the 10 criteria, whereas two papers [1.7% (1/60)] met two and seven [1.7% (1/60)] criteria. Publications originated mainly from the Americas [45.0% (27/60)] and in the last 16 years (2003-2019) [81.7% (49/60)], and most of the sampled dogs were stray dogs [65.0% (39/60)]. The most commonly used diagnostic test for leptospirosis was the microscopic agglutination test [78.4% (47/60)] followed by polymerase chain reaction [21.7% (13/60)], and the most common serovars were Canicola [71.4% (35/49)], Icterohaemorrhagiae [65.3% (32/49)], Grippotyphosa [40.8% (20/49)], and Pomona [40.8% (20/49)]. In conclusion, our results showed that Leptospira spp. are present in unowned dogs worldwide; however, the low-methodological quality of the recovered cross-sectional studies precluded a meta-analysis.
{"title":"Canine leptospirosis in stray and sheltered dogs: a systematic review.","authors":"Anna Cecília Trolesi Reis Borges Costa, Raisa Abreu Bragança Colocho, Carine Rodrigues Pereira, Andrey Pereira Lage, Marcos Bryan Heinemann, Elaine Maria Seles Dorneles","doi":"10.1017/S1466252321000190","DOIUrl":"10.1017/S1466252321000190","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the prevalence of leptospirosis among stray and sheltered dogs worldwide. Six databases were searched, which resulted in the retrieval of 476 articles. Sixty articles were selected for analysis according to 10 quality criteria. Among the selected papers, 26 papers [43.4% (26/60)] met five of the 10 quality criteria established, 10 papers [16.7% (10/60)] met three criteria, nine papers [15.0% (9/60)] met four criteria, six papers [10.0% (6/60)] met six criteria, four papers [6.7% (4/60)] met eight criteria, and three papers [5.0% (3/60)] met nine of the 10 criteria, whereas two papers [1.7% (1/60)] met two and seven [1.7% (1/60)] criteria. Publications originated mainly from the Americas [45.0% (27/60)] and in the last 16 years (2003-2019) [81.7% (49/60)], and most of the sampled dogs were stray dogs [65.0% (39/60)]. The most commonly used diagnostic test for leptospirosis was the microscopic agglutination test [78.4% (47/60)] followed by polymerase chain reaction [21.7% (13/60)], and the most common serovars were Canicola [71.4% (35/49)], Icterohaemorrhagiae [65.3% (32/49)], Grippotyphosa [40.8% (20/49)], and Pomona [40.8% (20/49)]. In conclusion, our results showed that <i>Leptospira</i> spp. are present in unowned dogs worldwide; however, the low-methodological quality of the recovered cross-sectional studies precluded a meta-analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"39-58"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40121914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1017/S1466252321000177
S. Fuentes, Claudia Gonzalez Viejo, E. Tongson, F. Dunshea
Abstract Livestock welfare assessment helps monitor animal health status to maintain productivity, identify injuries and stress, and avoid deterioration. It has also become an important marketing strategy since it increases consumer pressure for a more humane transformation in animal treatment. Common visual welfare practices by professionals and veterinarians may be subjective and cost-prohibitive, requiring trained personnel. Recent advances in remote sensing, computer vision, and artificial intelligence (AI) have helped developing new and emerging technologies for livestock biometrics to extract key physiological parameters associated with animal welfare. This review discusses the livestock farming digital transformation by describing (i) biometric techniques for health and welfare assessment, (ii) livestock identification for traceability and (iii) machine and deep learning application in livestock to address complex problems. This review also includes a critical assessment of these topics and research done so far, proposing future steps for the deployment of AI models in commercial farms. Most studies focused on model development without applications or deployment for the industry. Furthermore, reported biometric methods, accuracy, and machine learning approaches presented some inconsistencies that hinder validation. Therefore, it is required to develop more efficient, non-contact and reliable methods based on AI to assess livestock health, welfare, and productivity.
{"title":"The livestock farming digital transformation: implementation of new and emerging technologies using artificial intelligence","authors":"S. Fuentes, Claudia Gonzalez Viejo, E. Tongson, F. Dunshea","doi":"10.1017/S1466252321000177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252321000177","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Livestock welfare assessment helps monitor animal health status to maintain productivity, identify injuries and stress, and avoid deterioration. It has also become an important marketing strategy since it increases consumer pressure for a more humane transformation in animal treatment. Common visual welfare practices by professionals and veterinarians may be subjective and cost-prohibitive, requiring trained personnel. Recent advances in remote sensing, computer vision, and artificial intelligence (AI) have helped developing new and emerging technologies for livestock biometrics to extract key physiological parameters associated with animal welfare. This review discusses the livestock farming digital transformation by describing (i) biometric techniques for health and welfare assessment, (ii) livestock identification for traceability and (iii) machine and deep learning application in livestock to address complex problems. This review also includes a critical assessment of these topics and research done so far, proposing future steps for the deployment of AI models in commercial farms. Most studies focused on model development without applications or deployment for the industry. Furthermore, reported biometric methods, accuracy, and machine learning approaches presented some inconsistencies that hinder validation. Therefore, it is required to develop more efficient, non-contact and reliable methods based on AI to assess livestock health, welfare, and productivity.","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":"23 1","pages":"59 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44733832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1017/s1466252322000056
{"title":"AHR volume 23 issue 1 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s1466252322000056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1466252322000056","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51313,"journal":{"name":"Animal Health Research Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48968003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}