Dorchies P, Alzieu J P, Cadiergues M C
Laboratoire de Parasitologie, Ecole nationale vétérinaire, Toulouse, France.
Vet Parasitol. 1997 Oct;72(2):179-84. doi: 10.1016/s0304-4017(97)00052-6.
A field trial was undertaken to assess the efficacy of each of two formulations of ivermectin and of closantel in prevention and treatment of Oestrus ovis in a naturally infected flock grazing on the foothills of the Pyrenees mountains, in south-western France. Within the flock, 875 sheep were randomly divided into four groups, and treated twice during the fly season, with an interval of 60 days between treatments. Group 1 sheep were treated with albendazole (ABZ) at a dose rate of 3.8 mg/kg to maintain control of trichostrongylid parasites without affecting O. ovis; Group 2 received closantel at a dose rate of 10 mg/kg because of its known persistent activity against O. Ovis; Groups 3 and 4 received ivermectin at a dose rate of 200 mcg/kg bodyweight by subcutaneous injection (Isc) and orally (Io), respectively. All sheep were managed as a single group throughout the study. In order to assess the prophylactic effect of each product, immediately prior to the scheduled second treatment on Day 60 (D60), five sheep from each group were chosen at random and necropsied. Similarly, to assess the therapeutic effect, another five sheep from each group were selected on D70 and necropsied for parasite counts. During the 120 days of the trial, a significant number of animals from each group were regularly individually examined to assess their clinical status with regard to O. Ovis infection. Clinical signs of infection had significantly declined in Groups 2, 3 and 4 by 10 days after treatment reaching their lowest level at D30. In the control group during this period, clinical signs increased. Ten days after the second treatment, (D70), there was also evidence of a significant response to treatment. Finally the between-treatment differences in clinical scores of the closantel and ivermectin groups were small, although scores in Group 1 sheep was suggestive of a higher challenge in the second half of the study. On the basis of the postmortem counts and arithmetic means, prophylactic efficacies for the treatments relative to ABZ treated group, were 97.7, 62.5 and 0%, for the closantel, Isc and Io groups respectively. Therapeutic efficacies for the closantel, Isc and Io were 100, 100 and 98% respectively.
在法国西南部比利牛斯山脉山麓自然感染的羊群中,进行了一项田间试验,以评估两种伊维菌素制剂和氯氰碘柳胺对羊狂蝇的预防和治疗效果。在该羊群中,875只绵羊被随机分为四组,并在苍蝇季节进行两次治疗,治疗间隔为60天。第1组绵羊以3.8毫克/千克的剂量率用阿苯达唑(ABZ)治疗,以维持对毛圆线虫寄生虫的控制而不影响羊狂蝇;第2组由于已知其对羊狂蝇有持续活性,以10毫克/千克的剂量率接受氯氰碘柳胺;第3组和第4组分别通过皮下注射(Isc)和口服(Io)以200微克/千克体重的剂量率接受伊维菌素。在整个研究过程中,所有绵羊作为一个单一群体进行管理。为了评估每种产品的预防效果,在第60天(D60)预定的第二次治疗前,从每组中随机选择五只绵羊进行剖检。同样,为了评估治疗效果,在第70天从每组中再选择五只绵羊进行剖检以进行寄生虫计数。在试验的120天内,定期对每组中的大量动物进行个体检查,以评估它们关于羊狂蝇感染的临床状况。治疗后10天,第2、3和4组感染的临床症状显著下降,在第30天达到最低水平。在此期间,对照组的临床症状有所增加。第二次治疗后10天(D70),也有证据表明对治疗有显著反应。最后,氯氰碘柳胺组和伊维菌素组的临床评分之间的治疗差异很小,尽管第1组绵羊的评分表明在研究后半期面临更高的挑战。根据尸检计数和算术平均值,相对于阿苯达唑治疗组,氯氰碘柳胺组、皮下注射组和口服组的预防效果分别为97.7%、62.5%和0%。氯氰碘柳胺组、皮下注射组和口服组的治疗效果分别为100%、100%和98%。