Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T03:38:21.872Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gastrointestinal carriage of Clostridium difficile in cats and dogs attending veterinary clinics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

T. V. Riley ,
J. E. Adams ,
G. L. O'Neill  and
R. A. Bowman
T. V. Riley
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology. University of Western Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre, Nedlands 6009, Western Australia
J. E. Adams
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology. University of Western Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre, Nedlands 6009, Western Australia
G. L. O'Neill
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology. University of Western Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre, Nedlands 6009, Western Australia
R. A. Bowman
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology. University of Western Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre, Nedlands 6009, Western Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Cats and dogs being treated at two veterinary clinics were investigated for gastrointestinal carriage of Clostridium difficile using selective solid and en-richment media. Thirty-two (39.5%) of 81 stool samples yielded C. difficile. There were significant differences in isolation rates between clinics, 61.0% of animals being positive at one clinic compared to 17.5% at the other (Chi-square, P < 0.005). Of 29 animals receiving antibiotics, 15 (52.0%) harboured C. difficile while 11 (23.9%) of 46 animals not receiving antibiotics were positive (Chi-square, P < 0.01). There was no difference in carriage rate between cats (38.1%) and dogs (40.0%). The environment at both veterinary clinics was surveyed for the presence of C. difficile. Fifteen of 20 sites at one clinic were positive compared to 6 of 14 sites at the other clinic. Both cytotoxigenic and noncytotoxigenic isolates of C. difficile were recovered from animals and environmental sites. These findings suggest that household pets may be a potentially significant reservoir of infection with C. difficile.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 107 , Issue 3 , December 1991 , pp. 659 - 665
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

References

REFERENCES

1.Mulligan, ME. Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile-induced intestinal disease. Rev Infect Dis 1984: 6 (Suppl 1): S222–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Levett, PN. Clostridium difficile in habitats other than the human gastrointestinal tract. J Infect 1986; 12: 253–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Borriello, SP, Honour, P, Turner, T, Barclay, F. Household pets as a reservoir for Clostridium difficile infection. J Clin Pathol 1983; 36: 84–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.O'Neill, GL, Beaman, MH, Riley, TV. Relapse versus reinfection with Clostridium difficile. Epidemiol Infect 1991. In press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Riley, TV, Wymer, V, Bamford, V, Bowman, RA. Clostridium difficile in general practice and community health. J Hyg 1986; 86: 13–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Riley, TV, Weatherall, F, Bowman, JM, Mogyrosy, J, Golldge, CL. Diarrhoea due to Clostridium difficile in general practice. Pathology 1991. In press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Brettle, RP, Poxton, IR, Murdoch, JMcC, Brown, R, Byrne, MD, Collee, JG. Clostridium difficile in association with sporadic diarrhoea. Br Med J 1982; 284: 230–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Bowman, RA, Riley, TV. Isolation of Clostridium difficile from stored specimens and comparative susceptibility of various tissue culture cell lines to cytotoxin. FEMS Microbiol Letts 1986; 34: 31–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Riley, TV, Bowman, RA, Carroll, SM. Diarrhoea associated with Clostridium difficile in a hospital population. Med J Aust 1983; 1: 166–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Bowman, RA, Riley, TV. Routine culturing for Clostridium difficile? Pathology 1984; 16: 240–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Carroll, SM, Bowman, RA, Riley, TV. A selective broth for Clostridium difficile. Pathology 1983; 15: 165–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Bowman, RA, Arrow, S, Riley, TV. Latex particle agglutination for detecting and identifying Clostridium difficile. J Clin Pathol 1986; 39: 212–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Brazier, JS. Cross-reactivity of Clostridium glycolicum with the latex particle slide agglutination reagent for C. difficile identification. In Borriello, SP, ed. Clinical and molecular aspects of anaerobes. Petersfield: Wrightson Biomedical Publishing Ltd., 1990: 293–6.Google Scholar
14.Riley, TV, Brazier, JS, Hassan, H, Williams, K, Phillips, KD. Comparison of alcohol shock enrichment and selective enrichment for the isolation of Clostridium difficile. Epidemiol Infect 1987; 19: 355–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Golledge, CL, McKenzie, T, Riley, TV. Extended spectrum cephalosporins and Clostridium difficile. J Antimicrob Chemother 1989; 23: 802–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Wilson, KH, Kennedy, MJ, Fekety, FR. Use of sodium taurocholate to enhance spore recovery on a medium selective for Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol 1982; 15: 443–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Wilson, KH. Efficiency of various bile salt preparations for stimulation of Clostridium difficile spore germination. J Clin Microbiol 1983; 18: 1017–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed