tulathromycin and Fever

In this field trial, a new combination product containing florfenicol and flunixin meglumine (FLOR-FM) was compared with commercially available products that contained only tulathromycin (TULA) or ceftiofur crystalline free acid (CCFA) for the treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF; rectal temperature >/=105.0 degrees F) in beef calves that received long-acting oxytetracycline at feedlot arrival. The overall mortality rate of the FLOR FM group (2.0%) was significantly (P less than .050) lower than the rates in the TULA and CCFA groups (10.0% and 20.0%, respectively; 50 animals/group), even though the first UF relapse rate of the FLOR FM group was significantly (P less than .050) higher than that of the TULA group. In the FLOR FM group, this resulted in per-animal economic advantages of Can$46.23 (versus TULA) and Can$108.77 (versus CCFA) based on equal costs for initial UF therapy. These results demonstrate that it is more cost-effective to administer FLOR FM than TULA or CCFA for initial UF therapy in feedlot calves at high risk for bovine respiratory disease that receive metaphylactic long-acting oxytetracycline at feedlot arrival.

Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cattle; Cattle Diseases; Cephalosporins; Clonixin; Disaccharides; Drug Combinations; Fever; Heterocyclic Compounds; Housing, Animal; Thiamphenicol

The purpose of this study was to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of florfenicol with that of tulathromycin for treatment of undifferentiated fever (UF) in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive metaphylactic tulathromycin on arrival at the feedlot. Calves that received therapeutic florfenicol had lower overall mortality (P=.045) and bovine respiratory disease mortality (P=.050) compared with calves that received therapeutic tulathromycin, but no significant differences were detected in feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, or other animal health variables. There was a net advantage of Can$41.19/treated animal in the florfenicol group versus the tulathromycin group. This study demonstrates that it is more cost-effective to use florfenicol than tulathromycin for the initial treatment of UF in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF that receive on-arrival metaphylactic tulathromycin.

Topics: Animals; Animals, Newborn; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bovine Respiratory Disease Complex; Cattle; Cattle Diseases; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Disaccharides; Fever; Heterocyclic Compounds; Thiamphenicol; Treatment Outcome

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of tulathromycin (DRAX) versus tilmicosin (MIC) or oxytetracycline (TET) as a metaphylactic antimicrobial in feedlot calves. Calves that received DRAX had significantly (P<.05) lower initial undifferentiated fever (UF) treatment and relapse rates; lower overall chronicity, overall mortality, and cause-specific mortality rates; higher average daily gains; and improved quality grades. However, calves that received DRAX also had poorer (P<.05) yield grades compared with calves that received MIC or TET and worse feed conversion compared with calves that received MIC. Net advantages in the DRAX group were 3.79CanDollars/animal and 16.96CanDollars/animal compared with the MIC and TET groups, respectively. Based on these results, DRAX is a more efficacious and cost-effective metaphylactic antimicrobial than MIC or TET in feedlot calves at ultra-high risk of developing UF. In addition, this study presents a comparison between two methods ("deads out" and "deads in") of calculating feedlot performance variables.

Topics: Animal Feed; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Canada; Cattle; Cattle Diseases; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Disaccharides; Eating; Female; Fever; Heterocyclic Compounds; Macrolides; Meat; Oxytetracycline; Random Allocation; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome; Tylosin; Weight Gain