Clinical endometritis (CE) is a serious disease leading to poor reproductive performances in lactating dairy cows, thus diminishing farm profitability. To preserve optimum reproductive efficiency, various strategies and therapeutic approaches have been proposed to manage cows with CE, often with contradictory results. Thus, investigating new paths to CE treatment is economically important. The aim of the present study was to test the efficacy of three therapeutic protocols on the clinical cure rate of CE, and improvement of reproductive performance. Cows with CE (n=42), 21–38 days in milk (DIM), were assigned to three treatment groups: PGF: cows (n=19) were treated systemically with two doses of d-cloprostenol, a PGF2α analogue, at 14-days intervals; CEFAX: cows (n=10) received an intrauterine infusion of the combined antibiotics Cefacetrile and Rifaximin; and NAX: cows (n=13) received systemic treatment with Ceftiofur crystalline free acid (CCFA). A control group included cows (n=36) free from CE (healthy group: HE). All cows were clinically re-examined after the end of the treatment protocol. The clinical cure rate was 73.7%, 80% and 69.2% in PGF, CEFAX, and NAX groups, respectively (P>0.05). The HE group had a significantly shorter calving to first service interval compared to CEFAX and PGF groups (P<0.05), however the difference was not significant with NAX group. The mean calving to fertilizing service interval (CFI) was slightly higher in all three treatment groups compared to the HE group, however the difference was not significant (P>0.05). CEFAX protocol resulted in shorter but not statistically significant CFI, compared to the PGF and NAX protocols. Services per conception rate were slightly lower (1.7) in the CEFAX group compared to HE (1.75), PGF (1.84) and NAX (2.23) groups, however these differences were not significant. First service conception rate and conception rate at 105 DIM did not differ statistically between the treatment groups. While the difference was not significant, CEFAX protocol had slightly better cure rate for CE, reducing the number of services per conception and boosting the resumption of ovarian activity after calving. Validating these finding on a larger herd size will improve the accuracy of these findings.
The efficacy of Echinops spinosus (Teskra) and PGF2α in the treatment of clinical endometritis (CE) on clinical recovery and reproductive performance was evaluated. A total of 20 Holstein-Friesian cows with CE that were 21-40 days in milk (DIM) were assigned to one of two experimental groups. Cows in the PGF group (n=10) received two doses of d-cloprostenol (analogue of PGF2α) 14 days apart. Cows in the Teskra group (n=10) received a decoction of Teskra root administered orally once daily for three days. The control group consisted of 20 clinically healthy cows (n=20; HE group). The clinical recovery rate was 70% and 40% in PGF and Teskra groups, respectively (P>0.05). The proportion of pregnant cows at first service was 35%, 40%, 20% in the HE, PGF, and Teskra groups, respectively (P>0.05). However, the conception rate until 120 DIM was significantly higher in the HE group compared to the Teskra group (P<0.05). The mean days from calving to the first service interval (CFSI) were significantly lower in the HE group compared to the PGF and Teskra groups (P<0.001). Cows in the Teskra group conceived approximately 35 d and 26 d later than cows in the HE and PGF groups, respectively (P<0.05). Cows in the Teskra group required about 2.4 services to become pregnant, compared to 1.8 and 1.6 for those in the HE and PGF groups, respectively (P>0.05). Except for CFSI, no significant differences were found between the HE and PGF groups for any of the tested parameters. The results indicate that endometritic cows treated with PGF2α had nearly the same reproductive performance as healthy cows and Teskra was not effective in treating CE in dairy cows.
Clinical endometritis (CE) is a multifactorial disease of dairy animals. Retained fetal membranes (RFM) and metritis are the major risk factors of CE in dairy cows. Because uterine inflammation affects the profitability of the dairy industry, antibiotics and hormonal therapies are commonly used to mitigate against the disease. However, the One-Health concept aims to reduce antibiotic use in food animals to avoid the emergence of drug resistance or residues in milk or meat. Thus, phytotherapy may represent a good alternative to antibiotics in food animals. Echinops spinosus (E. spinosus) is a natural plant known to have therapeutic, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, and wound-healing properties in vitro. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of E. spinosus as a preventive strategy for CE in dairy cows with other postpartum complications. Holstein–Friesian cows (n = 36) diagnosed with RFM or metritis enrolled in the study were allocated into three groups. One group received antibiotic treatment. Another group received prostaglandin injection (PG). The experimental group received E. spinosus decoction orally. As a control group, eutocic cows (n = 36), without RFM and metritis were included in the study. The efficiency of the treatment was based on the occurrence of CE and improved reproductive outcomes. At 30 ± 2 DPP, CE was diagnosed in 25%, 58.34%, and 75% in antibiotic, PG, and E. spinosus groups, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no differences between the groups at 55 ± 5 DPP (16.67%, 33.44%, and 41.67% in antibiotic, PG and E. spinosus groups, respectively, p > 0.05). The E. spinosus group had the longest open days, lowest conception rate at 150 DPP, and highest number of services per conception. Oral E. spinosus extract is ineffective as a therapeutic for cows at risk of CE. These findings may pave the way for future innovative strategies employing E. spinosus to protect cattle against endometritis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.