Download Derm Digest - Animal Dermatology Clinics

Derm Digest
VETERINARIAN EDITION
Indianapolis IN • Louisville KY • Marietta GA
Marina del Rey CA • Pasadena CA • San Diego CA • Tustin CA
Welcome to the Derm Digest for Veterinarians
Thank you for taking a moment to review our premiere issue of Derm Digest- Veterinarian Edition. The standard
edition of Derm Digest is written for clients and pet owners interested in animal dermatology while the goal of the
Veterinarian Edition is to provide veterinary professionals with the latest information in animal dermatology,
along with useful tips and information as provided by the doctors and staff of Animal Dermatology Clinic.
New Animal Dermatology Website
In July our revamped website was launched. There are new updates and features for veterinarians including a
calendar of dates where you can find our doctors are lecturing, dosing information for common drugs used at
Animal Dermatology Clinic and disease information handouts. The site is under constant development and we are
continuing to add information on a regular and ongoing basis. Go to www.animaldermatolgy.com and take a tour
of the site. You can also sign up to have Derm Digest-Veterinarian Edition emailed directly to you. While you’re
at it join our Facebook of the Animal Dermatology Clinic in your area (or all of them) as well as following us on
Twitter.
If you have suggestions of what you would like to see in upcoming issues of this newsletter, please email
[email protected] with “Dr suggestion” in the subject line. We will give each suggestion serious
consideration and try our best to exceed your expectations. In the meantime, please enjoy our first newsletter.
Dr. Andrew Rosenberg joins Animal Dermatology Clinic
Animal Dermatology Clinic is pleased to announce that Dr. Andrew Rosenberg has joined the staff of Animal
Dermatology Clinic. Dr. Rosenberg was practicing at Long Island Veterinary Specialists in Plainview, NY
and will now begin his residency program to attain Diplomate status from the American College of Veterinary
Dermatology.
He received his doctorate from Cornell University where he developed an interest in dermatology. "I am very
excited to be joining the Animal Dermatology Clinic team and look forward to working in such a beautiful part
of the country. I have a strong interest in both allergies and autoimmune skin diseases and my goal is to help
pets suffering from all dermatologic ailments."
Dr. Rosenberg is a native of Long Island and has relocated to Orange County, CA with his dog
Mason. He says that he enjoys skiing, watching sports and travelling in his spare time and will be watching
New York Jets football games this fall. Dr. Rosenberg will be seeing patients in the Tustin CA clinic.
www.animaldermatology.com
Page 2
Derm Digest-Vet Edition
In April 2009, the annual meeting of the North American Veterinary Dermatology Forum met in
Savannah, GA. The conference attracted leading and active veterinary dermatologists across the United
States for a week of lectures and continuing education. The following are abstracts from the conference.
Evaluation of otoscope cone disinfection techniques and contamination level in small animal
private practice
AL Kirby , WS Rosenkrantz‡, RM Ghubash , B Neradilek†, NL Polissar†
Animal Dermatology Clinic, Marina Del Rey, California, USA
‡ Animal Dermatology Clinic, Tustin, California, USA
† The Mountain-Whisper-Light Statistical Consulting, Seattle, Washington, USA
Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate the level of contamination of otoscope cones in
private practice, and to determine the most effective method of disinfection. Fifty-one small animal
practices participated in the study, which included a detailed survey regarding otoscope cleaning,
storage and usage. The hospitals were also informed that a quantitative culture of the cleaned stored
otoscope cones would be performed. One hospital went out of business prior to culture; so only 50
hospitals completed the study. Using sterile technique, 2 cones from each of the 50 hospitals were
swabbed and submitted for quantitative culture. 29% of the samples were contaminated and the
organisms consisted of: Flavobacterium brevis (10%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6%), Pseudomonas
alcaligenes (4%), Staphylococcus intermedius (4%), Corynebacterium spp. (2%), Bacillus spp. (1%),
Enterococcus faecalis (1%) Malassezia spp. (1%). There was no statistically significant difference
between storage type (dry vs. stored in solution) and for the instrumentation used to clean the cones
(brush, cotton-tipped applicator, both vs. none). There was a statistically significant difference
between the different cleaning solutions (p<. 001) and between the storage solutions (p=0.003). A
single most effective cleaning solution was unable to be determined due to the large number of
solutions utilized. Cetylcide G→ (Cetylite Industries, Inc., Pennsauken, NJ) was the most effective of
the three most commonly used storage solutions when used as directed (P<0.001). The level of
contamination had a positive association with the frequency of cone use and a negative association
with the frequency of storage solution replacement.
Source of Funding
This study is self-funded
Conflicts of Interest
No conflicts of interest have been declared.
Nisin impregnated wipes for the treatment of canine pyoderma and surface bacterial
Colonization
L. A. Frank1, E. M. Kirzeder1, J. A. Davis1, J. J. Rejman2
1Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, University of Tennessee, College of Veterinary
Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
2ImmuCell Corporation, 56 Evergreen Drive, Portland, ME 04103
Abstract: Nisin is an antimicrobial peptide produced by Lactococcus lactis. Nisin is marketed in a
wipe format to help prevent bovine mastitis. Recently methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp
isolated from companion animals were susceptible to nisin in vitro. The purpose of this research was
Derm Digest – Vet Edition
Page 3
to evaluate nisin wipes for treating surface infections and pyodermas in dogs. Study A enrolled 10
dogs with focal surface bacterial colonization. Cultures and cytology were obtained on Day 0. Dogs
were treated twice daily with nisin wipes and re-evaluated weekly. Study B enrolled 18 dogs with
superficial pyoderma. Cultures and cytology were obtained on Day 0. Two areas with similar lesions
were selected and randomly assigned to receive either treatment or nothing. Nisin wipes were applied
to the treatment areas twice daily. After one week dogs were started on clindamycin or another
antibiotic based on culture and susceptibility and rechecked weekly. Visual assessment and cytology
were performed at each recheck for both studies. In Study A, Pseudomonas was cultured from five
dogs and Staphylococcus intermedius from two dogs. The lesions of four dogs resolved with treatment
while those with Pseudomonas and Malassezia did not. In Study B, cultures from all but one dog
yielded Staphylococcus intermedius susceptible to clindamycin. In 10 dogs treated areas showed
improvement after one week and cleared more rapidly than the untreated areas. Mean time until
cytological resolution was 1.4 versus 2.1 weeks. The mean time until clinical resolution was 2.5 versus
2.8 weeks. Nisin wipes demonstrated efficacy in treating some dogs with bacterial skin infection.
This study was funded by ImmuCell Corporation.
Efficacy of metaflumizone plus amitraz for treatment of juvenile and adult onset generalized
demodicosis in dogs: pilot study of 24 dogs
W.S. Rosenkrantz
Animal Dermatology Clinic, Tustin, CA
Abstract: A spot-on formulation containing metaflumizone plus amitraz (ProMeris®/ProMeris Duo®
for dogs, Fort Dodge Animal Health, Overland Park, KS) was evaluated in 24 dogs with juvenile (n =
13) or adult onset (n=11) generalized demodicosis. Case selection included option for initial therapy
by
owner preference (3/24), undesirable side effects of previous treatment (6/24) or lack of efficacy of
previous treatments (15/24). All were treated with a minimum dose rate (20mg kg-1of metaflumizone
and amitraz, 0.133ml/kg-1) at a 14 day interval until 2 consecutive negative skin scrapings were
obtained. Cases were evaluated every 30 days. The treatment times ranged from 90 – 180 days. The
results were based on reduction of mite numbers. A grading score was assigned as excellent if no mites
were identified for 60 days (2 negative scrapings), good if 75% reduction, fair if 50% reduction and
poor if no change in mites numbers within 90 days. Other antimicrobial therapies were allowed
throughout the study. Cases were monitored for side effects and complications. Of the 13 juvenile
onset cases, 12/13 (92.3%) had excellent results and 1/13 (7.7%) had poor results. In the 11 adult onset
cases, 5/11 (45.4%) had excellent results, 3/11 (27.3%) had good results and 3/11 (27.3%) had poor
results. Side effects included a pemphigus foliaceus-like pustular eruption (1), vomiting (1), diarrhea
(2), transient lethargy (2) and product odor (7). Efficacy was comparable to other products, and
metaflumizone plus amitraz is an approved alternative to other treatment options. Longer term
remission and cure rates still need to be evaluated.
The spot-on formulation metaflumizone plus amitraz (ProMeris®/ProMeris Duo® was supplied by
Fort Dodge Animal Health, Overland Park, KS