Efficacy of virginiamycin for the control of periodontal disease in calves

Abstract

Periodontal diseases are multifactorial infectious processes caused by complexes of microorganisms, with damage to health, production, and animal welfare. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of virginiamycin in the prevention and control of two early forms of periodontal disease: gingivitis and necrotizing gingivitis. Ten weaned calves, aged four to six months, were permanently kept in a single lot under the same rotational grazing regime in a newly reformed area of Panicum maximum. Five of the calves were orally administered 340mg of virginiamycin (Virginiamycin Group) daily for a period of 18 weeks, while the remaining five calves (Control Group) remained under the same food management but did not receive virginiamycin. During this period, animals underwent 18 weekly evaluations regarding periodontal health, with monitoring and recording of clinical parameters of the eight deciduous incisor teeth on the labial and lingual faces. At approximately two-week intervals, nine collections of subgingival sulcus material from five sites of the four right incisor teeth of each animal were performed and subjected to microbiological evaluation using polymerase chain reaction with primers of 25 microorganisms considered potentially pathogenic. After 1440 periodontal clinical evaluations of incisor teeth of the 10 calves, a total of 395 episodes of gingivitis were recorded, of which 267 occurred in the Control Group and 128 in the Virginiamycin Group. Similarly, 89 episodes of necrotizing gingivitis were recorded; 58 in the Control Group and 31 in the Virginiamycin Group. Comparison of between-group means found significant differences for teeth with gingivitis and necrotizing gingivitis (t test; p<0.05). The total number of teeth with gingivitis (p<0.01) and necrotizing gingivitis (p<0.01) in Control Group was significantly higher than that of gingivitis (p<0.01) and necrotizing gingivitis (p<0.05) in the Virginiamycin Group. There was a positive correlation between total occurrence of gingivitis and necrotizing gingivitis in the Virginiamycin Group by Pearson’s test. Virginiamycin had a protective effect on treated animals compared with the Control Group (OR = 0.36: CI (95%) = 0.27-0.43). In the Control Group, Actinomyces israelli (4.74%), domain Archaea (1.58%), Eikenella corrodens (1.05%), Fusobacterium nucleatum (27.37%), class Mollicutes (5.26%); Porphyromonas endodontalis(5.26%); Porphyromonas gulae(0.53%), Prevotella buccae (6.32%), Prevotella loescheii (3.68%), Prevotella nigrescens (8.42%), Prevotella oralis (1.58%), Tannerella forsythia (0.53%), and Treponema denticola (4.21%) were detected at healthy sites, and gingivitis or necrotizing gingivitis samples. In the Virginiamycin Group, A. israelli (3.41%), domain Archaea (0.98%), F. nucleatum (9.27%), class Mollicutes(4.39%), P. endodontalis (4.39%), P. gulae (0.49%), P. buccae (8.29%), P. loescheii (6.83%), P. nigrescens (15.61%), P. oralis (1.46%), Selenomonas sputigena (0.49%), T. forsythia (0.49%), and T. denticola (2.44%) were detected. In conclusion, virginiamycin administered at a dosage of 340mg/animal/day significantly reduced the occurrence of gingivitis and necrotizing gingivitis in cattle maintained on reformed pastures, and was revealed to have action against periodontal bacterial microbiota considered to be potentially pathogenic.

Oral affections in an ex situ population of marsh deer (Blastocerus dichotomus): a retrospective study (1990-2020)

“…The hypothesis that dietary factors are an important component that would act on dental conditions and systemic health has been reported in studies involving different animal species (Dutra et al 1993, Gawor et al 2006, Borsanelli et al 2017b, Campello et al 2019, including deer (Pérez-Barbería & Gordon 1998, Stimmelmayr et al 2006, Mackenzie et al 2011. In domestic ruminants, newly reformed pastures and new opening areas for livestock are recognized as risk factors for the prevalence of periodontal diseases (Döbereiner et al 1975, Dutra et al 1993, Ramos et al 2019. Ramos et al (2019) described the occurrence of periodontal diseases (gingivitis and necrotizing gingivitis) in cattle kept under grazing in areas of newly reformed pastures.…”

“…On the other hand, the set of periodontal diseases involves a group of multifactorial infectious and inflammatory diseases with different types of clinical manifestations, whose etiology is associated with dysbiosis of the oral biofilm (Hajishengallis 2015, Kinane et al 2017. Clinical signs initially include an inflammatory gingival process (gingivitis), characterized by edema, hyperemia, spontaneous bleeding, or probing, which may induce necrosis (Logan et al 1995, Lyon 2005, Ramos et al 2019, or progression of periodontal involvement (Hajishengallis 2015, Shaw et al 2016. In sheep, periodontitis and odontogenic abscesses are associated with the use of newly cultivated forage (Silva et al 2016).…”

“…Several studies have reported a well-established association between periodontal diseases and systemic disorders in cattle (Ramos et al 2019) and sheep (Anderson & Bulgin 1984, Baker & Britt 1990. It is known that oral bacteria and bacterial products from untreated periodontal disease and peri-apical infection can reach circulation and cause distant diseases such as subacute bacterial endocarditis (Kumar 2017).…”

Pathology of chronic ovine periodontitis

“…Several edema degrees cause submucosal spacing between collagen fibers in all sheep evaluated due to inflammation. Edema was a clinical sign that Ramos et al (2019) observed in calves with gingivitis. Döbereiner et al (1974) also observed this change in their study in cattle, in which they noticed that the collagen fibers were disorganized in mild to moderate intensity in the periodontal region.…”

Determination of prophylactic and therapeutic effectiveness of probiotic strain Escherichia coli 39-SN

“…Probiotics should not have contraindications for use and should not cause adverse reactions in the body after administration [ 13 ]. The primary task of the Kazakh production of probiotics intended to maintain and restore the symbiotic microbiocenoses of humans and animals is the production of competitive drugs that are not inferior in their consumer properties to similar imported drugs [ 14 , 15 ].…”