Use of the Product Ceftonit for the Treatment of Mastitis in Cows

The study was conducted at CJSC Agrofirm Volga in the Marksovsky District and FSUE Mummovskoye of the K.A. Timiryazev Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy in the Atkarsky District of the Saratov Region (Russia), on lactating cows of the Simmental and Holstein-Friesian breeds diagnosed with clinical mastitis (n=34). The diagnosis of serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis was based on clinical signs.

The clinical presentation of mammary gland diseases in lactating cows was monitored throughout the experiment until mammary gland function was restored. For the treatment of mastitis in cows, the Ceftonit preparation manufactured by NITA-FARM LLC (Russia) was used and compared with an other product containing 25 mg/ml of cefquinome sulfate. The preparations were administered parenterally according to the regimen presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Product administration regimen

Therapy efficacy was evaluated based on clinical signs and the results of the Masttest (manufactured by CJSC Agrofarm) and the settling test.

Animals were considered clinically healthy if the tests yielded negative results. Milk samples were analyzed for antibiotic residues using the BRT test (manufactured by AIM, Germany). Milk sampling was performed before drug administration, and at 24, 48, and 72 hours, as well as on day 5 after the start of treatment. Udder condition was monitored using a subclinical mastitis test for 21 days following the animals' recovery.

The results of the trials evaluating the preparations containing ceftiofur hydrochloride (groups 1 and 2) and cefquinome sulfate (groups 3 and 4) are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Therapeutic efficacy of preparations containing cefquinome sulfate and ceftiofur hydrochloride in serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis

The presented data indicate that a five-dose course of Ceftonit achieves 100% efficacy in treating serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis, with a recovery period of 4 to 5 days. Relapses in the form of subclinical mastitis were observed in 33.33% of cases, in contrast to the cefquinome sulfate-based product. The use of the cefquinome sulfate-based product for 5 days in the treatment of serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis also ensured 100% efficacy, with an average recovery time of 5 days; however, relapses were observed in 44.44% of cases.

Therefore, to achieve 100% therapeutic efficacy with an acceptable relapse rate in the treatment of serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis, a five-dose regimen of Ceftonit at 1.0 ml per 50 kg of body weight is required, administered at 24-hour intervals.

The obtained results support the recommendation of Ceftonit for the treatment of mastitis in cows, including as part of a comprehensive treatment regimen.
The absence of antibiotic residues in milk is a key factor determining the feasibility of using these products in dairy herds without a milk withdrawal period.

Ceftiofur-based preparations can be used in lactating animals without restrictions for the treatment of bacterial infections. This is achieved because, when used according to the instructions, the product concentration does not exceed established regulatory limits, as confirmed by studies conducted both in Russia and internationally. However, there was still a concern that due to tissue changes caused by mastitis, ceftiofur might be excreted in milk in amounts exceeding permissible limits. Therefore, we conducted a study to detect the presence of antibacterial agents in milk. The study was conducted before product administration, during treatment, and after the animals had recovered (Table 3).

Table 3. Parameters of mammary gland secretion in cows before and after the administration of Ceftonit and a cefquinome sulfate-based product

As the presented data show, following both single and subsequent administrations of Ceftonit, no antibiotic residues were detected in any of the milk samples from cows suffering from mastitis. In contrast, following the administration of the cefquinome sulfate-based product, antibiotic residues were detected in all milk samples, which aligns with the withdrawal restrictions specified in its instructions for use. Thus, it can be confidently stated that the use of Ceftonit in the treatment of mastitis does not result in the rejection of milk due to antibiotic residues.

Based on the obtained data, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. Ceftonit is highly effective in the treatment of serofibrinous and purulent-catarrhal mastitis in cattle when administered five times at a dose of 1.0 ml per 50 kg of body weight, once every 24 hours, with mandatory recovery confirmation using a subclinical mastitis test;
2. the product offers a convenient dosage of 1 ml per 50 kg of body weight, unlike the popular analog which requires a dose of 1 ml per 25 kg;
3. Ceftonit is not detected in milk by the AIM BRT test (Germany), unlike the cefquinome sulfate-based product, allowing for uninterrupted milk production during treatment.

• Avdeenko V. S. Guidelines for the diagnosis, therapy, and prevention of mastitis in cows / V. S. Avdeenko. — Saratov, 2009. — 71 p.
• Slobodyanik V. I. Immunological aspects of the physiology and pathology of the bovine mammary gland / V. A. Parikov, V. I. Slobodyanik, V. V. Podberezny: Monograph. — Taganrog, 2009. — 375 p.
• Bagmanov M. A. Mammary gland pathology in domestic animals / M. A. Bagmanov: Monograph. — Kazan, 2011. — 229 p.
• Klimov N. T. Practical guide to the control of bovine mastitis / N. T. Klimov, V. I. Slobodyanik. — Voronezh, 2012. — 87 p.
• Kossaibati М. A., Esslemont R. J. (1997).The costs of production diseases in dairy herds in England //Veterinary Journal 154. P.41 —51.
• Livermore D.M., Williams J.D. b-Lactams: Mode of Action and Mechanisms of Bacterial Resistance. In Antibiotics Laboratory Medicine; Lorian,V. Ed.; Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, 1996. — P. 502— 528.
• Pomerantsev D. V. Study of ceftiofur residual levels after the course administration of the Ceftimag® preparation / V. L. Liepa, A. E. Oborin, A. V. Gavrikov // Veterinary Medicine. 2012. No. 12. P. 13-15.