Comparative study of a commercial formula containing natural antimicrobials versus oral cephalexin or topical chlorhexidine-miconazole therapies for treating superficial pyoderma in dogs

BACKGROUND: Chronic and recurrent pyoderma in dogs is driving a growing interest in natural antimicrobial products that offer minimal adverse effects and avoid antibiotic resistance. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of dermatological products with antimicrobial peptides and plant extracts, comparing them to chlorhexidine + miconazole and cephalexin therapy for superficial pyoderma in dogs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five dogs with superficial pyoderma underwent clinical, cytopathological and microbiological diagnosis, and were randomly assigned to Group 1 (G1) treated with shampoo (two weekly baths) and lotion (twice daily on the affected areas) containing natural antimicrobials; Group 2 (G2) treated with two weekly baths using a therapeutic shampoo containing 2% chlorhexidine and 2.5% miconazole; or Group 3 (G3) treated with oral cephalexin 30 mg/kg twice daily. Staphylococcus spp. strains were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionisation-time of flight mass spectrometry and pruritus Visual Analog Scale (PVAS)/lesion scores were evaluated on Day (D)0, D7, D14, D21 and D28. RESULTS: Statistical differences (p < 0.05) were noted between D0 and D28 in PVAS values and lesion scores for all groups. G1 had lower PVAS scores than other groups on D7 and D14 (p < 0.05) and lower lesion scores than G3 on D7. By D28, G1 and G3 had lower lesion scores than G2. Notably, G1 and G2 had no adverse effects, while 26% of G3 patients experienced gastrointestinal issues during therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This preliminary investigation of the new product (G1) suggests that it is effective, safe and a promising topical treatment for managing superficial pyoderma in dogs, offering an alternative to systemic antibiotics and topical antiseptic treatments.

Authors: V. C. Gmyterco, F. B. Luciano, L. A. Ludwig, A. G. Evangelista, T. S. Ferreira, F. Borek and M. R. de Farias Title: Comparative study of a commercial formula containing natural antimicrobials versus oral cephalexin or topical chlorhexidine-miconazole therapies for treating superficial pyoderma in dogs Full source: Journal, Year,Vol Volume, Iss Issue, pp Pages
Résumé, analyse et commentaires
Aucun.
Photo
Aucune.
Analysis
None.
Abstract	Source
BACKGROUND: Chronic and recurrent pyoderma in dogs is driving a growing interest in natural antimicrobial products that offer minimal adverse effects and avoid antibiotic resistance. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of dermatological products with antimicrobial peptides and plant extracts, comparing them to chlorhexidine + miconazole and cephalexin therapy for superficial pyoderma in dogs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five dogs with superficial pyoderma underwent clinical, cytopathological and microbiological diagnosis, and were randomly assigned to Group 1 (G1) treated with shampoo (two weekly baths) and lotion (twice daily on the affected areas) containing natural antimicrobials; Group 2 (G2) treated with two weekly baths using a therapeutic shampoo containing 2% chlorhexidine and 2.5% miconazole; or Group 3 (G3) treated with oral cephalexin 30 mg/kg twice daily. Staphylococcus spp. strains were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionisation-time of flight mass spectrometry and pruritus Visual Analog Scale (PVAS)/lesion scores were evaluated on Day (D)0, D7, D14, D21 and D28. RESULTS: Statistical differences (p < 0.05) were noted between D0 and D28 in PVAS values and lesion scores for all groups. G1 had lower PVAS scores than other groups on D7 and D14 (p < 0.05) and lower lesion scores than G3 on D7. By D28, G1 and G3 had lower lesion scores than G2. Notably, G1 and G2 had no adverse effects, while 26% of G3 patients experienced gastrointestinal issues during therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This preliminary investigation of the new product (G1) suggests that it is effective, safe and a promising topical treatment for managing superficial pyoderma in dogs, offering an alternative to systemic antibiotics and topical antiseptic treatments.