Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 20:10:1155772.
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1155772. eCollection 2023.

Factors associated with antimicrobial resistant enterococci in Canadian beef cattle: A scoping review

Kayla M Strong  1   2 , Kaitlin L Marasco  1 , Jesse Invik  1 , Heather Ganshorn  3 , Richard J Reid-Smith  2   4   5 , Cheryl L Waldner  6 , Simon J G Otto  2   7 , John P Kastelic  1 , Sylvia L Checkley  1   2
Affiliations

Factors associated with antimicrobial resistant enterococci in Canadian beef cattle: A scoping review

Kayla M Strong et al. Front Vet Sci. .

Abstract

Introduction: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health concern, occurring when bacteria evolve to render antimicrobials no longer effective. Antimicrobials have important roles in beef production; however, the potential to introduce AMR to people through beef products is a concern. This scoping review identifies factors associated with changes in the prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant Enterococcus spp. applicable to the Canadian farm-to-fork beef continuum.

Methods: Five databases (MEDLINE, BIOSIS, Web of Science, Embase, and CAB Abstracts) were searched for articles published from January 1984 to March 2022, using a priori inclusion criteria. Peer-reviewed articles were included if they met all the following criteria: written in English, applicable to the Canadian beef production context, primary research, in vivo research, describing an intervention or exposure, and specific to Enterococcus spp.

Results: Out of 804 screened articles, 26 were selected for inclusion. The included articles discussed 37 factors potentially associated with AMR in enterococci, with multiple articles discussing at least two of the same factors. Factors discussed included antimicrobial administration (n = 16), raised without antimicrobials (n = 6), metal supplementation (n = 4), probiotics supplementation (n = 3), pen environment (n = 2), essential oil supplementation (n = 1), grass feeding (n = 1), therapeutic versus subtherapeutic antimicrobial use (n = 1), feeding wet distiller grains with solubles (n = 1), nutritional supplementation (n = 1) and processing plant type (n = 1). Results were included irrespective of their quality of evidence.

Discussion: Comparability issues arising throughout the review process were related to data aggregation, hierarchical structures, study design, and inconsistent data reporting. Findings from articles were often temporally specific in that resistance was associated with AMR outcomes at sampling times closer to exposure compared to studies that sampled at longer intervals after exposure. Resistance was often nuanced to unique gene and phenotypic resistance patterns that varied with species of enterococci. Intrinsic resistance and interpretation of minimum inhibitory concentration varied greatly among enterococcal species, highlighting the importance of caution when comparing articles and generalizing findings.

Systematic review registration: [http://hdl.handle.net/1880/113592].

Keywords: Enterococcus spp.; antimicrobial resistance; beef; cattle; scoping review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA-ScR flow diagram of the stages of article selection for inclusion in the Scoping review of reported factors associated with antimicrobial resistant enterococci in Canadian beef cattle.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Geographic distribution of articles included in the Scoping review of reported factors associated with antimicrobial resistant enterococci in Canadian beef cattle. Seven articles’ research locations in the United States were not state-specific and are thus not included in the map.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Types of enterococcal species reported within Scoping review of reported factors associated with antimicrobial resistant enterococci in Canadian beef cattle (n = 26). Graph reports the number of articles reporting each enterococcal species. Thirteen articles discussed more than one Enterococcus species, with a maximum of nine species discussed within one article.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization . Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance [internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; (2015).
    1. Zaheer R, Cook SR, Barbieri R, Goji N, Cameron A, Petkau A, et al. Surveillance of enterococcus spp. reveals distinct species and antimicrobial resistance diversity across a one-health continuum. Sci Rep. (2020) 10:3937. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-61002-5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wall B, Mateus A, Marshall L, Pfeiffer D, Lubroth J, Ormel H, et al. Drivers, Dynamics and Epidemiology of Antimicrobial Resistance in Animal Production. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; (2016).
    1. McCubbin KD, Anholt RM, de Jong E, Ida JA, Nóbrega DB, Kastelic JP, et al. Knowledge gaps in the understanding of antimicrobial resistance in Canada. Front Public Health. (2021) 9:726484. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.726484, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brault SA, Hannon SJ, Gow SP, Warr BN, Withell J, Song J, et al. Antimicrobial use on 36 beef feedlots in western Canada: 2008–2012. Front Vet Sci. (2019) 6:329. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00329, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types