Türkiye’de Klinik At Mastitisinin Mikrobioyolojik ve Sitolojik Yönden Araştırılması

Year 2023, Volume: 18 Issue: 2, 71 - 75, 16.08.2023

Alper Mete

Abstract

At mastitisi nadir görülen bir durumdur ancak mikrobiyal patojenin emziren taya bulaşması durumunda septisemi, artrit ve pnömoni gibi bazı ciddi klinik durumlara neden olabilir. Kısrakların kendileri de mastit ile ilişkili lokal ve sistemik klinik belirtiler gösterebilir. Türkiye'de klinik at mastitisinin mikrobiyal etiyolojisini sitolojik inceleme eşliğinde değerlendiren çok az veri mevcuttur. 2016-
2022 yılları arasında klinik olarak mastitisli toplam 22 adet kısraktan tanı laboratuvarına kabul edilen süt/meme salgı örnekleri bakteriyel-fungal kültür ve sitolojik yöntemlerle incelendi. En yaygın bakteri izolatının Streptococcus equi subsp. zooepidemicus (%54,6), ardından Escherichia coli(%27,4) gelmektedir. Fungal patojen izole edilmedi. Sitolojik incelemeler, dejeneratif değişiklikler
ve hücre içi bakteri varlığı ile birlikte güçlü nötrofilik infiltrasyonu varlığını (%80<) ortaya çıkardı. Laktasyondaki kısraklarda (n=9), E. coli ve S. zooepidemicus toplam altı örnekten eşit olarak izole
edilirken, bunu S. aureus (n=1), E. cloacae (n=1) ve S. maltophilia (n=1). Laktasyonda olmayan kısraklarda ise dokuz örnekte en sık izole edilen etken S. zooepidemicus olurken, bunu 3 örnekle E.
coli ve 1 örnekle S. epidermidis izledi. İleride Türkiye'deki at popülasyonlarında subklinik mastitis olguları ve etkenlerin antimikrobiyal direnç profilleri ile ilgili daha kapsamlı çalışmalar yapılmalıdır.

Keywords

Bakteriyel enfeksiyon, kısrak, mastitis, sitoloji

Microbiological and Cytological Investigation of Clinical Equine Mastitis in Türkiye

Abstract

Equine mastitis is an uncommon but may cause some serious clinical conditions including septicemia, arthritis, and pneumonia when transmission of the microbial pathogen to the nursing foal. Mares themselves also may show local and systemic clinical signs associated with mastitis. Little data are available evaluating microbial etiology of clinical equine mastitis associated with cytologic examination in Türkiye. Milk orudder secretion samples, which were admitted to the diagnostic laboratory from a total of 22 clinically mastitic mares, were examined by bacterial-fungal culture and cytological methods between 2016 and 2022. The most common bacterial isolate was found to be Streptococcus equi subsp. zooepidemicus (54.6%), followed by Escherichia coli(27.4%). No fungal pathogen was isolated. Cytologic examinations revealed the presence of strong neutrophilic infiltration (<80%) associated with degenerative changes and the presence of intracellular bacteria. In lactating mares (n=9), E. coli and S. zooepidemicus were equally isolated from a total of 6 samples, followed by S. aureus (n=1), E. cloacae (n=1), and S. maltophilia (n=1). On the other hand, in non-lactating mares, S. zooepidemicus was the most prevalent agent isolated from 9 samples, followed by E. coli from 3 samples and S. epidermidis from 1 sample. Further, more comprehensive studies should be conducted regarding subclinical cases and antimicrobial resistance profiles of the agents isolated from equine mastitis cases in horse populations in Türkiye.

Keywords

Bacterial infection, cytology, mare, mastitis

References

• 1. Canisso IF, Podico G, Ellerbrock RE. Diagnosis and treatment of mastitis in mares. Equine Vet Educ. 2021;33(6):320-326. [CrossRef]
• 2. Kocabıyık AL, Büyükcangaz E, Akkoç A, et al. Disseminated Streptococcus equi subsp. zooepidemicus infection in a foal and associated mastitis in a mare. Turk J Vet Anim Sci. 2008;32:487-490.
• 3. Perkins NR, Threlfall WR. Mastitis in the mare. Equine Vet Educ. 2002;5:99-102.
• 4. Greiner EC, Mays MB, Smart GC, Weisbrode SE. Verminous mastitis in a mare caused by a free-living nematode. J Parasitol. 1991;77(2):320-322.
• 5. Podico G, Gray SM, Wang L, Canisso IF. A novel Streptococcus species causing clinical mastitis in a pregnant donkey. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2021;33(5):979-983. [CrossRef]
• 6. McCue PM, Wilson WD. Equine mastitis-a review of 28 cases. Equine Vet J. 1989;21(5):351-353. [CrossRef]
• 7. Böhm KH, Klug E, Jacob BJ. Mastitis in the mare – a long term study on the incidence, clinical symptoms, diagnostics, microbiology, therapy, and economic importance, as well as recommendations for veterinary practice. Prakt Tierazt. 2009;90:842-849.
• 8. Knottenbelt D. The mammary gland. In: Knottenbelt DC, Pascoe RR, Lopate C, eds. Equine Stud Farm Medicine and Surgery. 1st ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2003:325-342.
• 9. Hughes K. Development and pathology of the equine mammary gland. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2021;26(2):121-134. [CrossRef]
• 10. Motta RG, Listoni FJP, Ribeiro MG, et al. Microbiologic characterization of equine mastitis. J Bacteriol Parasitol. 2014;5(3):1-3.
• 11. Domańska D, Trela M, Pawliński B, Podeszewski B, Domino M. The indicators of clinical and subclinical mastitis in equine milk. Animals (Basel). 2022;12(4):440. [CrossRef]
• 12. Jackson PGG. Equine mastitis: comparative lessons. Equine Vet J. 1986;18(2):88-89. [CrossRef]
• 13. McCue PM, Sitters S. Lactation. In: McKinnon AO, Squires EL, Vaala WE, Varner DD., eds. Equine Reproduction. West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell; 2011:2277-2290.
• 14. Ohnishi M, Sawada T, Marumo K, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility and genetic relatedness of bovine Stenotrophomonas maltophiliaisolates form a mastitis outbreak. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2012;54(6):572-576. [CrossRef]
• 15. Sumon SMMR, Parvin MS, Ehsan MA, Islam MT. Relationship between somatic cell counts and subclinical mastitis in lactating dairy cows. Vet World. 2020;13(8):1709-1713. [CrossRef]
• 16. Fredebeul-Krein FF, SchmengerA, Wente N, Zhang Y, KrömkerV. Factors associated with the severity of clinical mastitis. Pathogens. 2022;11(10):1089. [CrossRef]
• 17. Sadoon AS. Clinical and subclinical mastitis in buffalue in Mosul area, Iraq. IJVS. 2021;36(1):177-186. [CrossRef]
• 18. Zigo F, Vasil’ M, Ondrašovičová S, Výrostková J, Bujok J, PeckaKielb E. Maintaining optimal mammary gland health and prevention of mastitis. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8:607311. [CrossRef]
• 19. Waldridge BM. Mammary gland. In: McKinnon AO, Squires EL, Vaala WE, Varner DD, eds. Equine Reproduction. West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell; 2011:2162-2164.
• 20. Motta RG, Ribeiro MG, Langoni H, et al. Study of routine diagnostic methods of mastitis in mares. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec. 2011;63(4):1028-1032. [CrossRef]