Health and Growth Performance of High-Risk Cattle Treated with Nuflor® or Draxxin®

Health and Growth Performance of High-Risk Cattle Treated with Nuflor® or Draxxin®

Nuflor (florfenicol) an Efficacious, Economical Antibiotic for BRD

Abstract:

In the fall of 2006, a randomized, blinded clinical trial was performed at a commercial feedyard in Nebraska. In a treatment study, a total of 555 high-risk, male beef cattle were treated with either NUFLOR (florfenicol) at 40/mg/kg or Draxxin (tulathromycin) at 2.5 mg/kg after developing respiratory disease. These animals came from a larger population of cattle that were treated with Draxxin at 2.5 mg/kg at the time of initial processing.

The results of this study from a peer-reviewed article¹show that NUFLOR continues to be an efficacious and economical antibiotic for the treatment of bovine respiratory disease.

Study Objective

To determine the relative efficacy and cost effectiveness of NUFLOR with Draxxin for the initial treatment of clinical bovine respiratory disease of high-risk cattle that receive tulathromycin on arrival at the feedyard.

Study Description

A bovine respiratory disease treatment study. This was a close-out study and the animals were followed to harvest. The average
study duration was approximately 275 days.

Treatments

NUFLOR: n = 281 head; 40 mg/kg, subcutaneously
Draxxin: n = 274 head; 2.5 mg/kg, subcutaneously

Morbidity

There were no significant (p>0.05) differences in the first, second or third relapse rates in feedlot cattle treated with either NUFLOR
or Draxxin. In addition, the rates of chronics were similar and not significantly different between these two treatments.

Mortality

The use of Nuflor as the first-line treatment resulted in statistically lower overall mortality (p<0.045) and BRD mortality (p<0.05) than
Draxxin. This data is presented in Figures 1 and 2. There were no significant differences between these treatment groups with regard to Histophilus mortality, metabolic mortality or any other cause of death.

Figure 1

nuflor vs draxxin

Figure 2

nuflor vs draxxin

Performance and Carcass Data

There were no significant differences between treatment groups
for the performance parameters of weight gain, carcass weight or average daily gain. There were no differences in carcass characteristics (yield grade, quality grade) between treatment groups in this study.

Economic Analysis

The cost effectiveness of these treatments was analyzed and compared. The overall mortality and BRD-specific mortality were included in the economic model because the response of
these outcomes were statistically (p<0.05) different.

The differences in average cost of treatment (with a ~$3.00 higher Draxxin cost per animal) were also included in the economic analysis. The economic analysis of this data showed a $41.19 net advantage to using NUFLOR for first-line treatment of bovine
respiratory disease.

Summary

The results of this study show that firstline treatment with NUFLOR provided a net $41.19 economic advantage over Draxxin in high-risk cattle following metaphylaxis with Draxxin on arrival. In this study, there were no significant differences in treatment relapses, chronics, weight gain, average daily gain or carcass characteristics of cattle treated with either NUFLOR or Draxxin. The results of this study from a peer-reviewed article show that NUFLOR continues to be an efficacious and economical antibiotic for the treatment of bovine respiratory disease.

¹Perrett, T. et al (2008). A Comparison of Florfenicol and Tulathromycin for the Treatment of Undifferentiated Fever in Feedlot Calves. Vet Ther 9(2): 128-140.