Impact of the use of β-lactam antimicrobials on the emergence of Escherichia coli isolates resistant to cephalosporins under standard pig-rearing conditions

The aim of this study was to evaluate if the treatments with ceftiofur and amoxicillin are risk factors for the emergence of cephalosporin resistant (CR) E. coli in a pig farm during the rearing period. One hundred 7-day-old piglets were divided into two groups, a control (n = 50) group and a group parenterally treated with ceftiofur (n = 50). During the fattening period, both groups were subdivided in two. A second treatment with amoxicillin was administered in feed to two of the four groups, as follows: group 1 (untreated, n = 20), group 2 (treated with amoxicillin, n = 26), group 3 (treated with ceftiofur, n = 20), and group 4 (treated with ceftiofur and amoxicillin, n = 26). During treatment with ceftiofur, fecal samples were collected before treatment (day 0) and at days 2, 7, 14, 21, and 42 posttreatment, whereas with amoxicillin, the sampling was extended 73 days posttreatment. CR E. coli bacteria were selected on MacConkey agar with ceftriaxone (1 mg/liter). Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), MICs of 14 antimicrobials, the presence of cephalosporin resistance genes, and replicon typing of plasmids were analyzed. Both treatments generated an increase in the prevalence of CR E. coli, which was statistically significant in the treated groups. Resistance diminished after treatment. A total of 47 CR E. coli isolates were recovered during the study period; of these, 15 contained blaCTX-M-1, 10 contained blaCTX-M-14, 4 contained blaCTX-M-9, 2 contained blaCTX-M-15, and 5 contained blaSHV-12. The treatment with ceftiofur and amoxicillin was associated with the emergence of CR E. coli during the course of the treatment. However, by the time of finishing, CR E. coli bacteria were not recovered from the animals.

Aniseikonia tests: The role of viewing mode, response bias, and size-color illusions.

PURPOSE To identify the factors responsible for the poor validity of the most common aniseikonia tests, which involve size comparisons of red-green stimuli presented haploscopically. METHODS Aniseikonia was induced by afocal size lenses placed before one eye. Observers compared the sizes of semicircles presented haploscopically via color filters. The main factor under study was viewing mode (free viewing versus short presentations under central fixation). To eliminate response bias, a three-response format allowed observers to respond if the left, the right, or neither semicircle appeared larger than the other. To control decisional (criterion) bias, measurements were taken with the lens-magnified stimulus placed on the left and on the right. To control for size-color illusions, measurements were made with color filters in both arrangements before the eyes and under binocular vision (without color filters). RESULTS Free viewing resulted in a systematic underestimation of lens-induced aniseikonia that was absent with short presentations. Significant size-color illusions and decisional biases were found that would be mistaken for aniseikonia unless appropriate action is taken. CONCLUSIONS To improve their validity, aniseikonia tests should use short presentations and include control conditions to prevent contamination from decisional/response biases. If anaglyphs are used, presence of size-color illusions must be checked for. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE We identified optimal conditions for administration of aniseikonia tests and appropriate action for differential diagnosis of aniseikonia in the presence of response biases or size-color illusions. Our study has clinical implications for aniseikonia management.