Epidemiology of toe tip necrosis syndrome in western Canadian feedlot cattle
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Lameness continues to cause significant problems in profitability, productivity, and animal welfare in the feedlot industry. Toe tip necrosis syndrome (TTNS) is a new name for a previously reported condition. By definition, TTNS is separation of the apical white line with tissue necrosis and clinical lameness. This definition includes complications such as pedal (P3) osteitis, middle (P2) and proximal (P1) phalangeal osteomyelitis, tendonitis, tenosynovitis, cellulitis, and embolic pneumonia. Anecdotal experiences from practitioners report this lameness in feedlot cattle will develop within weeks after feedlot entry. Often the hindlimbs, specifically the lateral claw, are affected where a separation of the dorsal wall and sole will be noticed. Secondary infections will progress deeper into the foot and become systemic. Unfortunately, despite treatment, these animals can become very lame and will need to be euthanized. The overall objective of this project was to describe the epidemiology of TTNS in western Canadian feedlot cattle. The specific objectives were 1) to use clinical examinations, imaging modalities, and necropsy findings to aid in description, classification, and characterization of TTNS lesions, 2) to describe the epidemiology of TTNS in feedlot cattle, and 3) to evaluate risk factors for TTNS. Upon further investigation into this arrival related condition it became apparent that there were many different descriptors: P3 necrosis, toe abscess, apicus necrotica, apical pedal bone necrosis or toe necrosis. These names and descriptors of toe tip lesions were based on anecdotal experiences and previous case reports. As a result, traditional epidemiological approaches that included field investigations, clinical and necropsy examinations were implemented to identify, characterize and describe this condition. Based on clinical findings, imaging modalities, and necropsy specimens examined during September to December 2012, inclusive, a more specific name and descriptive case definition were introduced. TTNS descriptive epidemiology was described by use of a retrospective database analysis from Feedlot Health Management Services (FHMS) with 702 veterinarian confirmed TTNS cases by necropsy examination. From this database, there were 30% (210/702) of necropsy cases treated for TTNS and 70% of cases (492/702) that were not treated. Of those animals treated, the mean and standard deviation (median) interval from feedlot arrival to first treatment was 18.9 ±1.7 d (12 d). The mean (standard deviation) days on feed until death from TTNS was the earliest in grass-fed calves (32.4 ± 22.1 d), followed by auction-derived (40.6 ± 40.6 d), ranch direct (44.1 ± 53.1 d), and back-grounded calves (69.0 ± 75.6 d) (P < 0.001). Yearlings were on feed for a mean (standard deviation) days of 37.1 ± 32.0 d when compared to calves at 49.5 ± 57.0 d before death (P < 0.001). The greatest proportion of deaths occurred from September to November. There were 96.2% (1,832/1,904) of lots without one case of TTNS and 3.8% (72/1,904) of lots had one or more TTNS cases. A prospective case-control study to identify TTNS risk factors consisted of 148 total necropsy submissions (82 cases, 66 controls) from three feedlot veterinary practices and 16 feedlots during October 2012 to January 2013, inclusive. Confirmation of feet samples by the principal investigator at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine reduced the total to 135 animals: 67 cases and 68 controls. The measure of agreement (kappa) on classification of TTNS cases and controls between the veterinary practice and WCVM was 0.778 (P < 0.001). Bacterial culture results revealed that 75% of pure isolates in TTNS cases were attributed to Escherichia coli, Streptococcus spp., Trueperella pyogenes, Fusobacterium necrophorum. TTNS cases were 3.8 times more likely than control animals to have BVDV isolated (95% CI 1.7-8.5; P < 0.001). TTNS animals were 2.2 times more likely than control animals to have histopathological evidence of vasculitis (95% CI 1.0-4.6; P = 0.04). BVDV samples were 11.2 times more likely to show histopathological evidence of vasculitis than non-BVDV samples (95% CI 4.7-27.0; P < 0.001). A decreased difference was found in sole thickness at the toe tip (P < 0.001). There was no evidence of pedal bone rotation between case and control animals (P = 0.15). In summary, TTNS is a specific term for apical white line separation with tissue necrosis and clinical lameness. A practitioner's field diagnosis of TTNS based on apical white line separation and tissue necrosis is accurate on clinical signs alone. TTNS is a transport or arrival related condition in feedlot cattle that has a propensity for cases to cluster together. Pure bacterial isolates provide an understanding of the pathogens responsible for TTNS and that environmental pathogens contribute to an ascending infection. BVDV, vasculitis and apical sole thickness were risk factors associated with TTNS; however, their exact role requires further investigation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».