Vet Dermatol 2020 DOI: 10.1111/vde.

12886

Antimicrobial susceptibility monitoring of canine and

feline skin and ear pathogens isolated from European
veterinary clinics: results of the ComPath Surveillance
programme
Anno de Jong* , Myriam Youala*, Farid El Garch*, Shabbir Simjee*, Markus Rose*, Ian Morrissey†
and Hilde Moyaert*
*CEESA ComPath Study Group, 168 Av de Tervueren, 1150 Brussels, Belgium
†IHMA Europe S

arl, 1870 Monthey, Switzerland
Correspondence: Hilde Moyaert, c/o CEESA, 168 Av de Tervueren, 1150 Brussels, Belgium. E-mail: hilde.moyaert@zoetis.com

Background – The ComPath project is a pan-European programme dedicated to the monitoring of antimicrobial
susceptibility of canine and feline pathogens using standardized methods and centralized minimal inhibitory con-
centration (MIC) determination.
Objectives – To report antimicrobial susceptibilities of major pathogens isolated from nontreated animals with
acute clinical signs of skin, wound or ear infections in 2013–2014.
Methods and materials – MICs were determined by agar dilution for commonly used drugs and interpreted
using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints, if available.
Results – Of 1,676 isolates recovered, the main species isolated from dogs were Staphylococcus pseudinter-
medius, followed by Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli. In cats, Pasteurella mul-
tocida, coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) and Staphylococcus aureus were isolated most frequently.
Resistance rates observed for S. pseudintermedius were <26.7% for penicillin, clindamycin and chlorampheni-
col, and ≤11.5% for ampicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanate, cephalexin, cefovecin, gentamicin and fluoroquinolones.
For S. aureus, resistance rates ranged up to 90.9% for b-lactams, and were 19.7% for clindamycin, 27% for fluo-
roquinolones and 0.0–6.1% for other drugs. The mecA gene was confirmed by PCR in 10.6% of S. pseudinter-
medius, 11.6% of CoNS and 31.4% of S. aureus isolates. In streptococci/enterococci, resistance to penicillin,
ampicillin and chloramphenicol ranged from 0.0% to 11.3%, whereas fluoroquinolone resistance ranged from
0.0% to 8.5%. For E. coli, resistance ranged from 13.8 to 15.9% for fluoroquinolones and from 86.2% to
100.0% for b-lactams. Low rates of resistance (0.0–6.3%) were observed in P. multocida, and for P. aeruginosa
resistance to gentamicin was 10.3%.
Conclusion – Overall, antimicrobial resistance of cutaneous/otic pathogens isolated from dogs and cats was low
(1–10%) to moderate (10–20%). For several pathogens, the paucity of CLSI recommended breakpoints for veteri-
nary use is a bottleneck.

resistant bacteria or their resistance determinants from

Introduction
Monitoring of antimicrobial resistance currently is a major
focus of attention on many international political agen-
das.1,2 The World Health Organization (WHO) considers
antimicrobial resistance to be an urgent global health
threat and has identified various strategies in the WHO
Global Action Plan to diminish the threat.1 Of major con-
cern is the emergence and spread of antimicrobial resis-
tance in bacteria, which impedes the adequate treatment
of bacterial infections in animals and humans.3 Addition-
ally, the potential for transmission of antimicrobial-
Accepted 14 June 2020
Sources of Funding: This study was self-funded.
Conflicts of Interest: All authors were full-time employees of
their respective named companies during the performance of the
study. AdJ is currently consultant to CEESA.
animals to humans has been a public health concern for
several decades.
In companion animals, bacterial skin infections associ-
ated with abscesses, bite wounds, otitis and superficial or
deep pyoderma are common in clinical practice.4–7 Among
these, pyoderma caused by Staphylococcus pseudinter-
medius is the most common infection in dogs,5,6,8 while in
cats superficial pyoderma is less common but subcuta-
neous abscesses following bite wounds, which are often
associated with Pasteurella multocida, occur fre-
quently.9,10 Other common cutaneous and otic pathogens
of dogs and cats include Escherichia coli, Proteus mirabilis,
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus spp. and beta-he-
molytic streptococci.11,12,13,14 Companion animals also
may be colonized or infected with bacteria pathogenic to
humans, such as Staphylococcus aureus.
Exposure of bacteria to antimicrobial drugs has the
potential to lead to selection for resistance, so

© 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology 1

de Jong et al.
antimicrobial susceptibility should be carefully monitored
and antimicrobial susceptibility data used to guide the
choice of the most appropriate drug for treatment pur-
poses over time. Despite their importance, standardized
and ongoing national programmes reporting the antimi-
crobial susceptibilities of dermatological pathogens of
dogs and cats are available only in a few European coun-
tries (i.e. Swedres-Svarm, 2018;15 GERM-Vet, 2018;16
RESAPATH, 2018)17. To address this relative paucity of
data, the Executive Animal Health Study Center (Centre
Europe en d’Etudes pour la Sante  Animale; CEESA) orga-
nizes microbial culture collections of pathogens from both
farm and companion animals, and monitors their antimi-
crobial susceptibility.18,19 The CEESA programmes are
based on harmonized methods of sampling and bacterial
isolation to establish pan-European collections of repre-
sentative pathogens from diseased animals not recently
exposed to antimicrobial treatment. CEESA’s ComPath
programme is dedicated to bacterial pathogens in com-
panion animals from four types of infections: skin, soft tis-
sue and ear (SST/ear); urinary tract; respiratory tract; and
periodontal disease.20,21 A single central laboratory deter-
mines the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) using
a panel of antibacterials commonly used in companion
animals. The results of the first ComPath programme
with isolates from the monitoring period 2008–2010 was
published previously.22 The data reported herein summa-
rize the major aerobic pathogens recovered from
untreated dogs and cats with confirmed, acute, SST/ear
infections during the second monitoring period (2013–
2014) across 12 European countries.
Methods and materials
Bacterial collection
Swabs from pyoderma lesions, wounds and ear canals as well as
skin biopsy samples for culture were collected according to a stan-
dardized protocol from dogs and cats with acute superficial or deep
pyoderma, wound infections, abscesses or otitis. Veterinary prac-
tices were instructed to forward only those specimens that were
considered to be clinically relevant to the presenting condition. Speci-
mens were excluded from consideration if the host animal was
known to be treated with antimicrobials within the four weeks before
the sampling or if the animal was chronically ill. Subclinical speci-
mens were not accepted. In all cases, only one isolate per bacterial
species per sample per pet for a given infection was allowed to help
prevent the collection of strains that were epidemiologically related.
In addition, only one pet from the same household or facility was
sampled. Samples were screened for nine target pathogens: Staphy-
lococcus intermedius group (SIG), S. aureus, coagulase-negative
staphylococci (CoNS), b-haemolytic Streptococcus spp., Enterococ-
cus spp. (dog specimens only), E. coli, P. mirabilis (dog specimens
only), P. aeruginosa and P. multocida. Twelve European countries
(Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the
Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK) were
included in the surveillance. In an attempt to achieve similar numbers
of isolates from each participating country, target numbers of isolates
were indicated varying from five (low prevalence bacteria) up to 60
(high prevalence bacteria) isolates per bacterial species per country.
In each country at least four geographically disseminated veteri-
nary practices or clinics were selected to participate in the survey.
Provision of the clinical SST/ear samples and processing according to
a uniform protocol for pathogen isolation were allocated to a single
national veterinary diagnostic laboratory in each participating country.
The specimens were cultured on standard media such as MacCon-
key agar (E. coli), Columbia agar supplemented with sheep blood
2 © 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology
(staphylococci, streptococci, P. multocida, B. bronchiseptica), and
Columbia or MacConkey agar (P. aeruginosa). For each sample, all
relevant background data were provided on a standard case report
form. The isolates were identified to genus and species levels by
standard biochemical tests or by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ion-
ization-time-of-flight (MALDI-ToF) mass spectrometry before ship-
ment to a central laboratory (IHMA Europe S
arl, Monthey,
Switzerland). In this programme, isolates of SIG were designated as
S. pseudintermedius based on previous recommendations,23 and all
feline strains of the SIG were confirmed by MALDI-ToF. Upon receipt
in the central laboratory, subculturing was performed to confirm the
viability and purity of the strains. If growth characteristics were incon-
sistent with the original species identity, the isolate’s identity was
verified by MALDI-ToF. In addition, the identity of all S. aureus and all
CoNS were confirmed by MALDI-ToF.
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing
All susceptibility testing was conducted at the central laboratory,
using standardised agar dilution methodology as recommended by
the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI).24 MICs were
determined for ≤18 drugs from 10 antimicrobial categories, repre-
senting eight classes authorised and commonly used in European
companion animal medicine for treatment of SST/ear infections.
Quality control tests were performed using E. coli ATCC 25922,
S. aureus ATCC 29213, P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853, Streptococcus
pneumoniae ATCC 49619 and Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212.
The following compounds were tested by means of two-fold serial
dilutions: amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (AMC; ratio 2:1), ampicillin,
cephalothin, cephalexin, cefadroxil, cefovecin, penicillin G, clin-
damycin, chloramphenicol, polymyxin B, spiramycin, gentamicin,
neomycin, enrofloxacin (ENR), marbofloxacin (MAR), orbifloxacin
(ORB), pradofloxacin (PRA) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
(TMS; ratio 1:19) over the concentration ranges indicated in Tables
S1–S9.
Data analyses
The MIC results were summarized and the isolates categorized as
susceptible, intermediate or resistant to the respective compounds
according to MIC breakpoints defined by the veterinary standard
VET08.25 With respect to the interpretation criteria, the CLSI is the
only organization providing internationally available breakpoints
specifically for bacteria isolated from dogs and cats. The establish-
ment of breakpoints for veterinary use, however, remains incomplete
so that veterinary-specific interpretive criteria are available only for
some drugs; for others, breakpoints derived from human health data
have been adopted and in other cases there are no breakpoints at
all.25 In the current project, of the agents investigated, clinical break-
points have been specifically established for some of the drug/bacte-
rial species applications of molecules such as ampicillin, AMC,
cephalothin, cefazolin, cefovecin, clindamycin, the fluoroquinolones
(FQs) and gentamicin. Breakpoints derived from human data were
used for ampicillin, first-generation cephalosporins, chloramphenicol,
penicillin G, oxacillin and TMS, but only if published in VET08.25
Breakpoints have not been set for cefadroxil, neomycin, polymyxin B
and spiramycin. The MIC50 and MIC90 values, MIC frequency distri-
bution and, if applicable, percentages of susceptible, intermediate or
resistant are presented for bacterial species with a total of >20 avail-
able isolates per animal species. The frequency of resistance for each
antimicrobial was described as follows: very low (0.1–1%), low (1–
10%), moderate (10–20%), high (20–50%), very high (50–70%) and
extremely high (>70%). The breakpoints applied are indicated in
Tables S1–S9.
Detection of mecA genes
In addition to the MIC determinations, susceptibility to oxacillin was
used as a phenotypic surrogate for methicillin in order to detect meti-
cillin-resistant (MR) staphylococci including S. pseudintermedius
(MRSP) and S. aureus (MRSA). The most reliable test for the detec-
tion of MR staphylococci is mecA PCR. All canine and feline
S. pseudintermedius isolates (n = 69) and CoNS (n = 13) with
 Dog/cat antimicrobial susceptibility survey

Table 1. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-positive bacteria cultured from skin/soft tissues/ear infections.
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius Staphylococcus aureus Coag-neg staphylococci Streptococcus spp. Enterococcus spp.
(618 dogs/33 cats) (66 dogs/36 cats) (32 dogs/54 cats) (213 dogs/34 cats) (71 dogs)
Antimicrobial S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%)
agent dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog/cat dog dog dog

Amoxicillin/ 89.6/90.9 1.5/0.0 8.9/9.1 27.3/30.6 24.2/36.1 48.5/33.3 59.4/100.0 12.5/0.0 28.1/0.0 -/100.0 -/0.0 -/0.0 - - -
clavulanic acid
Ampicillin 88.5/90.9 -/- 11.5/9.1 -/27.8 -/8.3 -/63.9 -/100.0 -/0.0 -/0.0 100.0/ -/0.0 -/0.0 97.2 - 2.8
100.0
Cephalothin 93.7/- 0.0/- 6.3/- 84.9/- 1.5/- 13.6/- -/- -/- -/- 99.5/- 0.5/- 0.0/- - - -
Cephalexin 89.5/- -/- 10.5/- 9.1/- -/- 90.9/- -/- -/- -/- 100.0/- 0.0/- 0.0/- - - -
Cefadroxil -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- - - -
Cefovecin 89.3/- 0.8/- 9.9/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- 98.1/- 1.4/- 0.5/- - - -
Oxacillin1 89.3/90.9 -/- 10.7/9.1 65.2/75.0 -/- 34.8/25.0 62.5/98.1 -/- 37.5/1.9 NT NT NT NT NT NT
Penicillin1 84.5/84.8 -/- 15.5/15.2 24.2/30.6 -/- 75.8/69.4 53.1/90.7 -/- 46.9/9.3 100.0/ -/- -/- 95.8 - 4.2
100.0
Clindamycin 70.9/- 2.6/- 26.7/- 78.8/- 1.5/- 19.7/- 84.4/- 6.3/- 9.3/- 83.1/- 2.3/- 14.6/- - - -
Spiramycin -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- - - - - - -
Chloramphenicol1 80.8/84.8 0.3/0.0 18.9/15.2 92.4/94.4 1.5/0.0 6.1/5.6 96.9/98.1 0.0/0.0 3.1/1.9 90.6/79.4 8.5/20.6 0.9/0.0 85.9 2.8 11.3
Polymyxin B -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- - - - - - -
Gentamicin1 87.2/84.8 3.2/3.0 9.5/12.1 95.5/100.0 1.5/0.0 3.0/0.0 75.0/96.3 6.3/1.9 18.7/1.9 - - - - - -
Neomycin -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- -/- - - - - - -
Enrofloxacin 89.6/87.9 1.3/3.0 9.1/9.1 72.7/72.2 0.0/0.0 27.3/27.8 75.0/98.1 12.5/0.0 12.5/1.9 52.1/55.9 46.9/44.1 0.9/0.0 - - -
Marbofloxacin 89.6/87.9 0.8/0.0 9.6/12.1 72.7/72.2 0.0/0.0 27.3/27.8 78.2/96.2 3.1/1.9 18.8/1.9 60.1/52.9 31.5/41.2 8.5/5.9 - - -
Orbifloxacin 89.6/87.9 0.2/0.0 10.1/12.1 71.2/72.2 1.5/0.0 27.3/27.8 59.3/98.1 21.9/0.0 18.8/1.9 10.8/8.8 87.8/88.2 1.5/2.9 - - -
2
Pradofloxacin 90.1/87.9 1.8/9.1 8.3/3.0 -/69.4 -/2.8 -/27.8 -/98.1 -/0.0 -/1.9 -/100.0 -/- -/- - - -
Trimethoprim/ 87.7/87.9 -/- 12.3/12.1 97.0/100.0 -/- 3.0/0.0 84.4/96.2 -/- 15.6/3.8 -/- -/- -/- - - -
sulfamethoxazole1

S, susceptible; I, intermediate; R, resistant; -, no CLSI breakpoint available; NT, not applicable.

1
Breakpoints, when given, are based on human data published in the VET08 document.
2
Only susceptible breakpoint available for penicillin against streptococci.
3
Pradofloxacin susceptibility data for streptococci is specifically for S. canis from cats only.

oxacillin MICs ≥0.5 µg/mL, and S. aureus isolates with MICs ≥4 µg/
mL (n = 32)25 were screened by PCR for the presence of the mecA
gene according to a method published previously.26 The species
identities of all oxacillin-resistant isolates were confirmed by MALDI-
ToF. Concurrently the mecA-positive strain S. aureus ATCC 43300
was used for quality control.
Results
A total of 1,676 isolates were recovered (1,409 from
dogs, 267 from cats). Isolates derived from ear infections,
pyoderma and wounds accounted for 45.9%, 27.0% and
20.0% of the collection, respectively. For 7.1% of the
samples, no detailed information on the kind of SST/ear
infection was given. Of the collected isolates, 4.0% came
from Belgium (n = 67), 10.9% from the Czech Republic
(n = 173), 5.7% from France (n = 95), 9.8% from Ger-
many (n = 164), 14.0% from Hungary (n = 233), 3.8%
from Italy (n = 64), 12.6% from the Netherlands
(n = 211), 15.2% from Poland (n = 254), 8.0% from Spain
(n = 134), 2.5% from Sweden (n = 42), 5.7 from Switzer-
land (n = 95) and 8.5% from the UK (n = 143).
Dogs
The most frequently isolated species from dogs was
S. pseudintermedius (n = 618; 43.6%) followed by Strep-
tococcus spp. (n = 213; 15.0%) which included S. canis
(n = 146), S. dysgalactiae (n = 45), S. castoreus (n = 12),
S. equi (n = 3), S. minor (n = 2), and one isolate each of
S. agalactiae, S. equisimilis, S. anginosus, S. porcinus
and S. intermedius. Other staphylococci isolated included
S. aureus from 66 specimens (5.0%) and CoNS from 32
specimens (2.2%), which included S. epidermidis (n = 9),
S. haemolyticus (n = 6), S. simulans (n = 4), two isolates
each of S. felis, S. hominis, S. sciuri and S. warneri, and
one isolate each of S. caprae, S. cohnii, S. lugdunensis,
S. schleiferi and S. succinus. The other Gram-positive
species were Enterococcus spp. isolated from 71 (5.0%)
of specimens, which included E. faecalis (n = 55), E. av-
ium (n = 4), E. hirae (n = 4), E. faecium (n = 3), E. canin-
testini (n = 2), and one isolate each of E. durans,
E. gallinarum and E. raffinosus.
Gram-negative bacteria isolated included P. aeruginosa
from 174 specimens (12.3%), E. coli from 138 specimens
(9.8%) and Proteus mirabilis from 78 specimens (5.5%).
Antimicrobial resistance rates (AMR) for all Gram-posi-
tive cocci are shown in Table 1. The MIC distributions for
S. pseudintermedius are shown in Table S1. For the com-
pounds without breakpoints against S. pseudinter-
medius, a monomodal (polymyxin B) or bimodal
(cefadroxil, neomycin, spiramycin) MIC distribution was
exhibited. For S. aureus, although accounting for only 4%
of the canine collection, resistance was generally mark-
edly higher and frequently >25% (Table 1). For the com-
pounds without breakpoints against S. aureus (cefadroxil,
cefovecin, neomycin, polymyxin B, spiramycin), bimodal
MICs were often apparent, suggesting decreased sus-
ceptibility for a few isolates (Table S2). MIC distributions
for CoNS are shown in Table S3.
For streptococci isolated from canine specimens, resis-
tance was low (0.0–1.5%) for all compounds tested,
except marbofloxacin and clindamycin (Table 1). Gentam-
icin, neomycin, cefadroxil and polymyxin B showed a
monomodal MIC distribution, and TMS exhibited a bimo-
dal MIC distribution, suggesting the development of
acquired resistance in part of the isolates (Table S4). For
enterococci, resistance was low for ampicillin and

© 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology 3

de Jong et al.

Table 2. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative bacteria cultured from skin/soft tissues/ear infections.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Pasteurella multocida
Escherichia coli (138 dogs only) Proteus mirabilis (78 dogs only) (174 dogs only) (79 cats only)
Antimicrobial
agent S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%) S (%) I (%) R (%)
1
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 0 0 100 94.9 1.3 3.9 - - - 75.9 22.8 1.3
Ampicillin 0 0 100 - - - - - - 67.1 26.6 6.3
Cephalothin - - - - - - - - - - - -
Cephalexin 0 13.8 86.2 - - - - - - - - -
Cefadroxil - - - - - - - - - - - -
Cefovecin - - - - - - - - - 97.5 0 2.5
Penicillin - - - - - - - - - - - -
Clindamycin - - - - - - - - - - - -
Spiramycin - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chloramphenicol1 73.9 18.1 8.0 42.3 35.9 21.8 - - - 100 0 0
Polymyxin B - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gentamicin 92.8 2.9 4.4 89.7 3.9 6.4 71.3 18.4 10.3 - - -
Neomycin - - - - - - - - - - - -
Enrofloxacin 84.1 1.5 14.5 74.4 3.9 21.8 - - - - - -
Marbofloxacin 85.5 0 14.5 78.2 11.5 10.3 - - - - - -
Orbifloxacin 81.2 2.9 15.9 37.2 38.5 24.4 - - - - - -
Pradofloxacin2 84.8 1.5 13.8 - - - - - - 100 - -
Trimethoprim/ 81.9 - 18.1 73.1 - 26.9 - - - - - -
sulfamethoxazole1
S, susceptible; I, intermediate; R, resistant; -, no CLSI breakpoint available.
1
Breakpoints for P. mirabilis are based on human data published in the VET08 document.
2
Breakpoints, when given, are based on human data published in the VET08 document.
3
Only susceptible breakpoint available for pradofloxacin against P. multocida.

penicillin and amounted to 11.3% for chloramphenicol
(Table 1). MIC distribution data for the enterococci are
presented in Table S5.
Antimicrobial resistance rates for Gram-negative bacte-
ria (P. aeruginosa, E. coli, P. mirabilis and P. multocida)
are shown in Table 2, and MIC distribution data for these
organisms are shown in Tables S6–S9). Notable observa-
tions include high rates of resistance to b-lactams in
E. coli. For drugs without breakpoints, bimodal or multi-
modal MIC distributions were noted. For the one drug
(gentamicin) with a published breakpoint against
P. aeruginosa, resistance was 10.3% (Table 2).
Cats
The single most frequently isolated species from cats
was P. multocida (n = 79; 29.6%). Staphylococci were
isolated from 123 specimens: these included S. aureus
from 36 (13.5%), S. pseudintermedius from 33 (12.4%)
and CoNS from 54 (19.5%); the CoNS included S. felis
(n = 44), S. simulans (n = 4), S. schleiferi (n = 2), and
one isolate each of S. condimenti, S. epidermidis,
S. sciuri and S. xylosus. Streptococcus spp. were iso-
lated from 34 specimens (12.7%) which included
S. canis (n = 24), S. dysgalactiae (n = 5), S. castoreus
(n = 1) and S. minor (n = 1). Bacterial species with <20
isolates included E. coli (n = 19; 7.1%) and P. aerugi-
nosa (n = 12; 4.5%).
Generally, susceptibility ranges for the feline isolates
were similar to those for dogs (Tables 1 and 2). For the
drugs without breakpoints, MIC distributions suggested
acquired resistance for a subset of the isolates. The resis-
tance of S. aureus to b-lactams, chloramphenicol, gen-
tamicin and TMS was markedly different from the
corresponding values for S. pseudintermedius (Table 2).
For the streptococci, resistance rates were generally
low (Table 1). For P. multocida, all isolates were suscepti-
ble to chloramphenicol and pradofloxacin, and low levels
of resistance were observed for the b-lactams (Table 2).
For the FQs, monomodal distributions were recorded
(Table S9). Feline isolates of E. coli and P. aeruginosa dis-
played similar resistance rates as those observed for
dogs (Table 2).
mecA gene detection
In total, 111 (13.2%) of the staphylococcal isolates har-
boured the mecA gene: 69 (10.6%) of S. pseudinter-
medius, 32 (31.4%) of S. aureus and 10 (11.6%) of
CoNS. Ninety-nine of these isolates came from dogs and
12 from cats. Three CoNS isolates (S. sciuri with oxacillin
MICs of 0.5 or 1 µg/mL) proved to be negative for mecA
genes. The mecA-positive CoNS included S. haemolyti-
cus (n = 6), S. epidermidis (n = 3) and S. warneri (n = 1).
Isolates carrying mecA genes were detected in staphylo-
coccal species from most participating countries. Resis-
tance of mecA-positive S. pseudintermedius to the non-
b-lactam antimicrobials amounted to 91.3% for TMS, var-
ied between 52.5% and 78.3% for clindamycin, gentam-
icin and the FQs, and was 20.3% for chloramphenicol
(Table 3). A similar rate of resistance to FQs was
observed for S. aureus, but resistance to gentamicin,
chloramphenicol and TMS was markedly lower (Table 3).
Similar MIC values were recorded for CoNS (n = 10; data
not shown).
Discussion
In the present ComPath programme we have determined
the antimicrobial susceptibility of major dermatological

4 © 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology

 Dog/cat antimicrobial susceptibility survey

Table 3. Activity of various non-b-lactam antimicrobials against mecA-positive staphylococci (n = 101).

S. pseudintermedius (n = 69) S. aureus (n = 32)

Antimicrobial agent S (%) I (%) R (%) MIC50 (µg/mL) MIC90 (µg/mL) S (%) I (%) R (%) MIC50 (µg/mL) MIC90 (µg/mL)
Clindamycin 15.9 5.8 78.3 >16 >16 46.9 0.0 53.1 4 >16
Chloramphenicol1 78.3 1.4 20.3 8 >16 87.5 3.1 9.4 8 16
Gentamicin1 27.2 20.3 52.5 16 32 90.6 3.1 6.3 0.25 0.5
Enrofloxacin 26.1 2.9 71.0 >8 >8 25.0 0.0 75.0 4 >8
Marbofloxacin 29.0 0.0 71.0 >8 >8 25.0 0.0 75.0 >8 >8
Orbifloxacin 29.0 0.0 71.0 >8 >8 25.0 0.0 75.0 >16 >16
Pradofloxacin 29.0 7.2 63.8 2 2 25.0 0.0 75.0 2 8
Trimethoprim/sulfa1 8.7 - 91.3 8 >8 93.8 - 6.2 0.06 0.12
MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration; S, susceptible (blue font); I, intermediate; R, resistant (red font).
Interpretation of the mecA positive staphylococci MIC data was according to CLSI breakpoints (VET08 document) defined for dogs irrespective of
the origin of the isolates. All 101 mecA-positive staphylococci showed unambiguous resistance to oxacillin.
1
The breakpoint is based on human data from the M100-S28 document. A dash indicates that no breakpoint has been set.

pathogens recovered from skin and ear canal infections
of dogs and cats across Europe. Standardised methodol-
ogy was applied and a central laboratory used to deter-
mine MICs.
In staphylococci, resistance levels varied according to
the bacterial species. Although some b-lactam drugs,
including amoxicillin in combination with a b-lactamase
inhibitor, exhibited variable activity, the FQs generally
were associated with moderate levels of resistance. With
a few exceptions (e.g. chloramphenicol, gentamicin and
TMS in MRSA), resistance in mecA-positive staphylo-
cocci was generally high for all antimicrobial classes
tested. In this collection, 99 staphylococci from dogs and
12 from cats harboured the mecA gene. This corresponds
to 13.8% and 9.8% of all recovered canine and feline
staphylococci, respectively. The prevalences of MRSP
and MRSA were 10.6% (69 of 651 isolates) and 31.4%
(32 of 102 isolates), respectively; in the preceding Com-
Path study22 these figures amounted to 6.3% and 5.4%,
respectively.22 The prevalence of MRSA/MRSP in Euro-
pean studies of canine and feline SST/ear isolates have
usually ranged from 0% to 10%,27,28,29 although higher
prevalence rates (11.6–33.3%) also have been
reported.30–32 By contrast, very low MRSP prevalence
has been reported from Norway (0.5%) and Sweden
(0.7%).15,33
It is well-known that MRSP and MRSA display high
levels of resistance to various non-b-lactam antibiotic
classes.34,35 This was confirmed in the present report
(Table 3), because the prevalence of multidrug resistance
(MDR) generally was higher in MR isolates than in the gen-
eral S. pseudintermedius and S. aureus collection (Table 1).
MRSP isolates tended to be resistant to more drugs than
MRSA isolates. This high prevalence of MDR is probably
related to the dissemination of dominant clones such as
sequence type (ST) 71, 258, 45, 261, 497 or 551.29,35–37
The prevalence of MRSP and MRSA in combination with
their MDR patterns in this project is a serious companion
animal health problem and underlines the need for employ-
ing culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing as the
basis for antimicrobial drug selection, particularly in patients
whose infections are complicated.39
Likewise, for Gram-negative bacteria, proportional resis-
tance differed markedly among the bacterial species (e.g.
E. coli versus P. mirabilis), and antimicrobial resistance in
P. multocida isolates was absent to rare. Among the
canine E. coli isolates, the highest frequency of resistance
was to b-lactam antibiotics (86.2–100.0%). Resistance to
FQs was lower at 13.8–15.9% and levels of resistance to
gentamicin and chloramphenicol were low at 4.4% and
8.0%, respectively. Similar results were noted for feline
E. coli isolates (data not shown). Differences observed
between international results may be difficult to interpret
due to differences in study design, methodology, drugs
tested and breakpoints used. For instance, one study40
reported 34.6–42.3% FQ resistance in isolates from cases
of canine otitis, and another41 reported resistance to FQs,
TMS and gentamicin at 11.1%, 9.8% and 7.6% (respec-
tively), and resistance to AMC, ampicillin and cephalothin
at >97%. A further study42 reported resistance to the
same b-lactam antibiotics (92.6–100.0%), FQs (12.3%)
and gentamicin (6.6%).
After E. coli, P. mirabilis is the most frequently isolated
bacterium from urinary tract infections in dogs, but in
SST/ear infections P. mirabilis is less common. Few stud-
ies have focused on antimicrobial resistance of canine
Proteus isolates recovered from SST/ear infections. Nev-
ertheless 78 P. mirabilis isolates were recovered from
skin and ear swabs, characterized by antimicrobial resis-
tance levels of 3.9–26.9% (Table 2). One study43 found
comparable patterns of resistance, and a another44
reported full susceptibility to ciprofloxacin and gentam-
icin. As a consequence of the paucity of other studies, a
conclusion about general trends of the susceptibilities of
P. mirabilis cannot be drawn.
A large number of antibiotics are not suitable for P.
aeruginosa infections due to intrinsic or acquired resistance
mechanisms. Exceptions are aminoglycosides, some
cephalosporins and FQs.45 For P. aeruginosa isolates, a
10.3% resistance rate to gentamicin was documented.
This is similar to the rate reported for (predominantly) ear
infection isolates (n = 71) from dogs and cats in Ger-
many,46 and canine isolates in Denmark.44 A lower rate of
resistance (2%) has been reported from Sweden.15
The above summary may be limited by the lack of
breakpoints for a variety of drug–bacterium combinations.
Although the first tentative CLSI standard was published
more than two decades ago, the number of antimicrobials
that have clinical breakpoints recommended for testing of
canine and feline SST isolates is limited to certain drug/

© 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology 5

de Jong et al.
bacterial species combinations. These include AMC,
ampicillin, cephalothin, cefazolin, cefovecin, clindamycin,
gentamicin and the FQs for canine isolates, and AMC,
ampicillin and the FQs for feline isolates.25 For the current
project, we have primarily used the veterinary-specific
breakpoints in addition to several human-derived break-
points that are included in VET08.25 Despite the applica-
tion of these human breakpoints for various drug/
pathogen combinations, there are still gaps for a number
of antimicrobials. For some pathogens such as P. multo-
cida, P. aeruginosa and Enterococcus spp., the majority
of clinically relevant compounds do not have defined
breakpoints. Similarly, most antimicrobials recommended
by European guidelines for therapy of SST infections in
dogs and cats47 [e.g. cefadroxil, clindamycin (cats) and
polymyxin B], have neither veterinary nor human break-
points established.25 This paucity of breakpoints illus-
trates the need for more companion animal-specific SST/
ear breakpoints to be set, in order to allow harmonized
therapeutic decisions. It is important to note that, in addi-
tion to the long-standing CLSI Veterinary Antimicrobial
Susceptibility Testing Subcommittee, a EUCAST Veteri-
nary Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test-
ing (VetCAST) has been established recently. One of the
remits of VetCAST is to initiate and coordinate EU
research aimed at filling the current gaps on veterinary-
specific breakpoints including those specific for bacteria
isolated from dogs and cats. The provision of MIC distri-
butions in Tables S1–S9 will allow future veterinary break-
points to be applied retrospectively.
Besides data from ad hoc studies, monitoring of the
antimicrobial susceptibility of SST/ear pathogens is pub-
lished on a regular basis at the national level in three EU
countries: the German GERM-Vet, the Swedish Swedres-
Svarm and the French RESAPATH programmes.15–17 The
comparison of our results to the findings of national resis-
tance monitoring programmes is only possible to a limited
extent owing to the collected species, their source/indica-
tion and the tested compounds. In addition, different collec-
tion protocols (treated/untreated animals), sample sizes,
test methods and, especially, the interpretive criteria used,
complicate the comparison. For instance, no comparisons
could be made with the French RESAPATH program
because only disk diffusion was conducted and national
interpretation criteria were used. 48 By contrast, the
methodology of GERM-Vet and Swedres-Svarm is similar
to that of VetPath; all three programmes focus on S. pseud-
intermedius. In general, GERM-Vet has reported higher
rates of resistance to S. pseudintermedius than in our study
(with the exception of chloramphenicol),19,49 while the Swe-
dres-Svarm project has reported lower resistance levels.15
There are several limitations to our surveillance pro-
gramme. First, the current project comprises a total of
1,676 clinical isolates and, although a substantial number,
this constitutes a relatively small sample of the total SST/
ear pathogen population in the EU. Furthermore, although
we can compare susceptibility results from one pro-
gramme to another, we should be cautious not to over-in-
terpret the findings. This is because the number of isolates
is low for certain bacterial species. It should also be kept in
mind that there is no guarantee that the isolates studied
are definitely associated with clinical disease; it cannot be
6 © 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology
excluded that some isolates belong to the commensal
flora. Finally, the lack of clinical breakpoints for some drug–
bacterium combinations limits the conclusions of the pro-
gramme, as no recommendation to a practitioner can be
made. Despite these shortfalls – which are inherent to all
surveillance studies – we are unaware of any European col-
lection of SST/ear isolates that is as representative of the
European population of companion animals, both in size
and geographical diversity.
In conclusion, the current ComPath survey is the only
international antimicrobial susceptibility monitoring pro-
gramme for dermatological pathogens from companion
animals using standardized methods and centralized MIC
determination. In general, the state of antimicrobial resis-
tance among most pathogens isolated from dogs and
cats is variable. The frequency of resistance in staphylo-
cocci and the occurrence of MRSP and MRSA are of con-
cern. In the framework of the responsible use of
antimicrobials, monitoring is emphasized as a key tool to
detect and follow the emergence of resistance in addition
to providing veterinarians with data to optimize therapy.
Furthermore, in acute situations surveillance data can
help inform rational empiric therapy.
Acknowledgements
This study was sponsored by Bayer (Germany), Boehrin-
ger Ingelheim Sante  Animale (France), Ceva (France),
Elanco Animal Health (UK), MSD Animal Health (Ger-
many), Vetoquinol (France), Virbac (France) and Zoetis
(Belgium). The authors thank the national co-ordinators
and the national microbiological laboratories involved in
the sampling and isolation procedures.
References
1. World Health Organization. Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial
Resistance. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/
94384/1/9789241506236_eng.pdf2, 2015 Accessed Aug 4, 2020.
2. United Nations. Draft political declaration of the high-level meet-
ing of the General Assembly on antimicrobial resistance. New
York, NY: UN Headquarters, 2019.
3. Schwarz S, Loeffler A, Kadlec K. Bacterial resistance to antimi-
crobial agents and its impact on veterinary and human medicine.
Vet Dermatol 2017; 28: 82-e19.
4. Hill PB, Lo A, Eden CAN, et al. Survey of the prevalence, diagno-
sis and treatment of dermatological conditions in small animals
in general practice. Vet Rec 2006; 158: 533–539.
5. Miller WH, Griffin CE, Campbell K. Muller and Kirk’s Small Ani-
mal Dermatology, 7th edition. St Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby,
2012; 184–222.
6. Muller GH, Kirk RW, Scott DW, et al. Muller and Kirk’s Small Ani-
mal Dermatology, 6th edition. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders
Co., 2001; 274–335.
7. Lloyd DH, Allaker RP, Pattinson A. Carriage of Staphylococcus
intermedius on the ventral abdomen of clinically normal dogs
and those with pyoderma. Vet Dermatol 1991; 2: 161–164.
8. van Duijkeren E, Catry B, Greko C, et al. Review on methicillin-re-
sistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius. J Antimicrob Che-
mother 2011; 66: 2,705–2,714.
9. Oehler RL, Velez AP, Mizrachi M, et al. Bite-related and septic
syndromes caused by cats and dogs. Lancet Infect Dis 2009; 9:
439–447.
10. Patronek GJ, Slavinski SA. Animal bites. J Am Vet Med Assoc
2009; 234: 336–345.

11. Ihrke PJ. Bacterial infections of the skin. In: Greene CE ed. Infec-
tious Diseases of the Dog and the Cat, 3rd edition. Philadelphia,
PA: W.B. Saunders Co., 2006; 807–823.
12. Lamm CG, Ferguson AC, Lehenbauer TW, et al. Streptococcal
infection in dogs: a retrospective study of 393 cases. Vet Pathol
2010; 47: 387–395.
13. Cole LK, Kwochka KW, Kowalski JJ, et al. Microbial flora and
antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of isolated pathogens from
the horizontal ear canal and middle ear in dogs with otitis media.
J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998; 212: 534–538.
14. Petersen AD, Walker RD, Bowman MM, et al. Frequency of iso-
lation and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Staphylococcus
intermedius and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from canine
skin and ear samples over a 6-year period (1992–1997). J Am
Anim Hosp Assoc 2002; 28: 407–413.
15. Swedres-Svarm. Consumption of antibiotics and occurrence of
resistance in Sweden 2017. Solna/Uppsala, Sweden: Public
Health Agency of Sweden and National Veterinary Institute.
Available at: https://www.sva.se/media/jzdlctnk/rapport_swedre
s-svarm_2018.pdf Accessed Aug 4, 2020.
16. GERM-Vet. Resistenzsituation bei klinisch wichtigen tierpatho-
gene Bakterien. BVL Report 12.5; Bericht zur Resistenz 2016.
Berlin, Germany: Federal Office of Consumer Protection and
Food Safety (BVL), 2018.
17. RESAPATH. French surveillance network for antimicrobial resis-
tance in pathogenic bacteria of animal origin, 2016 Annual
Report, 2018. resapath.anses.fr Accessed June 11, 2020.
18. de Jong A, Thomas V, Klein U, et al. Pan-European resistance
monitoring programmes encompassing food-borne bacteria and
target pathogens of food-producing and companion animals. Int
J Antimicrob Agents 2013; 41: 403–409.
19. El Garch F, de Jong A, Simjee S, et al. Monitoring of antimicro-
bial susceptibility of respiratory tract pathogens isolated from
diseased cattle and pigs across Europe, 2009–2012: VetPath
results. Vet Microbiol 2016; 194: 11–22.
20. Morrissey I, Moyaert H, de Jong A, et al. Antimicrobial suscepti-
bility monitoring of bacterial pathogens isolated from respiratory
tract infections in dogs and cats across Europe: ComPath
results. Vet Microbiol 2016; 191: 44–51.
21. Moyaert H, Morrissey I, de Jong A, et al. Antimicrobial suscepti-
bility monitoring of bacterial pathogens from urinary tract infec-
tions in dogs and cats across Europe: ComPath results. Microb
Drug Resist 2017; 23: 391–403.
22. Ludwig C, de Jong A, Moyaert H, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibil-
ity monitoring of dermatological bacterial pathogens isolated
from diseased dogs and cats across Europe (ComPath results). J
Appl Microbiol 2016; 1211: 1,254–1,267.
23. Devriese LA, Hermans K, Baele M, et al. Staphylococcus pseud-
intermedius versus Staphylococcus intermedius. Vet Microbiol
2009; 133: 206–207.
24. CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution
susceptibility tests for bacteria isolated from animals. Second
informational supplement. CLSI document VET01-S2. Wayne,
PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2013.
25. CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution
susceptibility tests for bacteria isolated from animals –, 4th ed.
CLSI supplement VET08. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory
Standards Institute, 2018.
26. Zhang K, McClure JA, Conly JM. Enhanced multiplex PCR assay
for typing of staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec types I
to V in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Mol Cell
Probes 2012; 26: 218–221.
27. Moodley A, Damborg P, Nielsen SS. Antimicrobial resistance in
methicillin susceptible and methicillin resistant Staphylococcus
pseudintermedius of canine origin: Literature review from 1980
to 2013. Vet Microbiol 2014; 171: 337–341.
28. Nienhoff U, Kadlec K, Chaberny IF, et al. Methicillin-resistant Sta-
phylococcus pseudintermedius among dogs admitted to a small
animal hospital. Vet Microbiol 2014; 150: 191–197.
29. Duim B, Verstappen KM, Broens EM, et al. Changes in the popu-
lation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius
© 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology
Dog/cat antimicrobial susceptibility survey
and dissemination of antimicrobial-resistant phenotypes in the
Netherlands. J Clin Microbiol 2016; 54: 283–288.
30. Haenni M, Alves De Moraes N, Ch^ atre P, et al. Characterisation
of clinical canine meticillin-resistant and meticillin-susceptible
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in France. J Glob Antimicrob
Res 2014; 2: 119–123.
31. Lehner G, Linek M, Bond R, et al. Case-control risk factor study
of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius
(MRSP) infection in dogs and cats in Germany. Vet Microbiol
2014; 168: 154–160.
32. Vantrella G, Moodley A, Grandolfo E, et al. Frequency, antimicro-
bial susceptibility and clonal distribution of methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in canine clinical samples
submitted to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory in Italy: a 3-year
retrospective investigation. Vet Microbiol 2017; 211: 103–106.
33. NORM/NORM-VET. Usage of antimicrobial agents and occur-
rence of antimicrobial resistance in Norway. Tromso/Oslo,
Norway, 2014. www.antibiotikaresistens.no Accessed Aug 5,
2020.
34. Ruscher C, L€ ubke-Becker A, Wleklinski C-G, et al. Prevalence of
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius isolated
from clinical samples of companion animals and equidaes. Vet
Microbiol 2009; 136: 197–201.
35. Perreten V, Kadlec K, Schwarz S, et al. Clonal spread of methi-
cillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in Europe and
North America: an international multicentre study. J Antimicrob
Chemother 2010; 65: 1,145–1,154.
36. Wegener A, Broens EM, Zomer A, et al. Comparative genomics
of phenotypic antimicrobial resistances in methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius of canine origin. Vet Micro-
biol 2018; 225: 125–131.
37. 
Kizerwetter-Swida M, Chrobak-Chmiel D, Rzewuska M, et al.
Changes in the population structure of canine methicillin-resis-
tant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in Poland. Vet Microbiol
2017; 208: 106–109.
38. Worthing KA, Abraham S, Coombs GW, et al. Clonal diversity
and geographic distribution of methicillin-resistant Staphylococ-
cus pseudintermedius from Australian animals: Discovery of
novel sequence types. Vet Microbiol 2018; 213: 58–65.
39. Saputra S, Jordan D, Worthing KA, et al. Antimicrobial resistance
in coagulase-positive staphylococci isolated from companion ani-
mals in Australia: a one year study. PLoS ONE 2017; 12:
e0176379.
40. Vingopoulou EI, Delis GA, Batzias GC, et al. Prevalence and mech-
anisms of resistance to fluoroquinolones in Pseudomonas aerugi-
nosa and Escherichia coli isolates recovered from dogs suffering
from otitis in Greece. Vet Microbiol 2018; 213: 102–107.
41. Thungrat K, Price SB, Carpenter DM, et al. Antimicrobial suscep-
tibility patterns of clinical Escherichia coli isolates from dogs and
cats in the United States: January 2008 through January 2013.
Vet Microbiol 2015; 179: 287–295.
42. Saputra S, Jordan D, Mitchell T, et al. Antimicrobial resistance in
clinical Escherichia coli isolated from companion animals in Aus-
tralia. Vet Microbiol 2017; 211: 43–50.
43. Grobbel M, Lu €bke-Becker A, Alesık E, et al. Antimicrobial sus-
ceptibility of Klebsiella spp. and Proteus spp. from various organ
systems of horses, dogs and cats as determined in the BfT-
GermVet monitoring program 2004–2006. Berl Mu € nch Tierarztl
Wochenschr 2007; 120: 402–411.
44. Pedersen K, Pedersen K, Jensen H, et al. Occurrence of antimi-
crobial resistance in bacteria from diagnostic samples from
dogs. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007; 60: 775–781.
45. Meletis G, Bagteri M. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Multi-drug-re-
sistance development and treatment options. In: Basak S, ed.
Infection Control. IntechOpen, 2013; 33–56. https://doi.org/10.
5772/55616
46. Werckenthin C, Alesık E, Grobbel M, et al. Antimicrobial suscep-
tibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from dogs and cats as well
as Arcanobacterium pyogenes from cattle and swine as deter-
mined in the BfT-GermVet monitoring program 2004–2006. Berl
Mu € nch Tierarztl Wochenschr 2007; 120: 412–422.
7
de Jong et al.

47. Jessen LR, Damborg PP, Spohr A, et al.Antibiotic Use Guideli-
nes for Companion Animal Practice. The Danish Small Animal
Veterinary Association, SvHKS, 2012. www.ddd.dk/sektioner/
hundkatsmaedyr/antibiotikavejledning/Documents/Antibiotic
Guidelines.pdf Accessed May 10, 2020.
48. Socie te
 Francßaise de Microbiologie. Comite
 de l’Antibiogramme
de la Socie te
 Francßaise de Microbiologie. Recommandations
Veterinaires. 8 http:/www.sfm-microbiologie.org, 2018.
Accessed Jun 29, 2020.
49. GERM-Vet. Resistenzsituation bei klinisch wichtigen tierpatho-
gene Bakterien. BVL Report 10.5; Berichte zur Resistenzmoni-
toringstudie 2011/2012. Berlin, Germany: Federal Office of
Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL), 2015.
Supporting Information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the
online version of this article.
Table S1. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Staphylococcus pseudintermedius isolates
from skin/soft tissue/ear infections (618 from dogs/33
from cats)
Table S2. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Staphylococcus aureus isolates cultured from
skin/soft tissue/ear infections (66 from dogs/36 from
cats).
Table S3. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of coagulase-negative staphylococci isolates cul-
tured from skin/soft tissue/ear infections (32 from dogs/
54 from cats).
Table S4. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Streptococcus spp. cultured from skin/soft tis-
sue/ear infections (213 from dogs/34 from cats).
Table S5. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Enterococcus spp. cultured from skin/soft tis-
sue/ear infections (71 from dogs).
Table S6. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Escherichia coli cultured from skin/soft tissue/
ear infections (138 from dogs).
Table S7. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Proteus mirabilis cultured from skin/soft tis-
sue/ear infections (78 from dogs).
Table S8. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa cultured from skin/
soft tissue/ear infections (174 from dogs).
Table S9. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distri-
butions of Pasteurella multocida cultured from skin/soft
tissue/ear infections (79 from cats).

Resume 
Contexte – Le projet ComPath est un programme europe en de die

a la surveillance de la sensibilite des
pathoge
nes aux anti-microbiens du chien et du chat
a l’aide de me thodes standardise es et centralisees de
determination de concentration minimale inhibitrice (MIC).
Objectifs – De crire les sensibilite
s anti-microbiennes de la plupart des pathoge
nes isole s d’animaux non
s avec des signes cliniques d’infections cutane
traite es, auriculaires ou de plaies en 2013-2014.
Mate riels et me thodes – Les MICs ont e  te
 de
termine es par dilution sur agar pour la plupart des mole cules
quemment utilise
fre es et interpre te
s par CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) si disponible.
Resultats – Sur les 1676 souches obtenues, la principale espe
ce isolee chez le chien e tait Staphylococcus
pseudintermedius, suivie de Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa et Escherichia coli. Chez le
chat, Pasteurella multocida, staphylocoque coagulase-ne gative (CoNS) et Staphylococcus aureus e taient
s les plus fre
isole quemment. Les taux de re sistance observe s pour S. pseudintermedius e taient <26.7%
pour la pe nicilline, la clindamycine et le chloramphe nicol, et ≤11.5% pour l’ampicilline, l’amoxicilline/acide
clavulanique, la ce phalexine, la cefove cine, la gentamicine et les fluoroquinolones. Pour S. aureus, les taux
de resistance allaient jusqu’
a 90.9% pour les b-lactames, et e taient 19.7% pour la clindamycine, 27% pour
les fluoroquinolones et 0.0–6.1% pour les autres mole cules. Le ge
ne mecA e tait confirme  par PCR pour
10.6% des S. pseudintermedius, 11.6% des CoNS et 31.4% des S. aureus. Pour streptococci/enterococci,
sistance
a la pe
la re nicilline, ampicilline et chloramphe nicol allait de 0.0%
a 11.3%, tandis que la re sistance
aux fluoroquinolones allait de 0.0% to 8.5%. Pour E. coli, la re sistance allait de 13.8
a 15.9% pour les fluo-
roquinolones et de 86.2%
a 100.0% pour les b-lactams. De faibles taux de re sistance (0.0–6.3%) e taient
observe s pour P. multocida, et la re sistance de P. aeruginosa
a la gentamicine e tait de 10.3%.
Conclusion – Ainsi, les re sistances antimicrobiennes des pathoge
nes auriculaires/cutane s isole
s de chiens
et chats e taient faibles (1-10%)
a mode  re
 (10-20%). Pour plusieurs pathoge
nes, le manque de donne es
recommande es de CLSI
a usage ve  te
rinaire est un facteur limitant.

Resumen
Introduccio  n – el proyecto ComPath es un programa paneuropeo dedicado al seguimiento de la suscepti-
bilidad antimicrobiana de pato genos caninos y felinos mediante me todos estandarizados y determinacio n
centralizada de concentracio n mınima inhibitoria (MIC).
Objetivos – Informar sobre la susceptibilidad antimicrobiana de los principales pato genos aislados de ani-
males no tratados con signos clınicos agudos de infecciones de la piel, heridas u oıdos en 2013-2014.
Me todos y materiales – las MICs se determinaron mediante dilucio n en agar para los medicamentos de
uso comu n clınica y labo-
n y se interpretaron utilizando los puntos de corte del Instituto de estandardizacio
ratorial (CLSI), si estaban disponibles.
Resultados – De los 1.676 aislados recuperados, las principales especies aisladas de perros fueron Staph-
ylococcus pseudintermedius, seguidas de Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa y Escherichia

8 © 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology

coli. En gatos, se aislaron con mayor frecuencia Pasteurella multocida, estafilococos coagulasa negativos
(CoNS) y Staphylococcus aureus. Las tasas de resistencia observadas para S. pseudintermedius fueron
<26,7% para penicilina, clindamicina y cloranfenicol, y ≤ 11,5% para ampicilina, amoxicilina/clavul anico,
cefalexina, cefovecina, gentamicina y fluoroquinolonas. Para S. aureus, las tasas de resistencia variaron
hasta el 90,9% para los b-lactamicos y fueron del 19,7% para la clindamicina, del 27% para las fluoroquino-
lonas y del 0,0 al 6,1% para otros farmacos. El gen mecA fue confirmado por PCR en el 10,6% de S. pseu-
dintermedius, el 11,6% de CoNS y el 31,4% de los aislados de S. aureus. En estreptococos/enterococos,
la resistencia a penicilina, ampicilina y cloranfenicol oscilaron entre el 0,0% y el 11,3%, mientras que la
resistencia a las fluoroquinolonas vario entre el 0,0% y el 8,5%. Para E. coli, la resistencia vario
 del 13,8 al
15,9% para las fluoroquinolonas y del 86,2% al 100,0% para los b-lact amicos. Se observaron tasas bajas
de resistencia (0,0-6,3%) en P. multocida, y para P. aeruginosa la resistencia a la gentamicina fue del
10,3%.

Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund – Das CompPath Projekt ist ein pan-europ€ €
aisches Programm, welches der Uberwachung der
antimikrobiellen Empfindlichkeit von caninen und felinen Pathogenen mittels standardisierter Methoden
und zentraler Bestimmung einer minimalen inhibitorischen Konzentration (MIC) dient.
Ziele – Der Beschreibung antimikrobieller Empfindlichkeiten von wichtigen Pathogenen, die von unbehan-
delten Tieren mit akuten klinischen Anzeichen auf der Haut, mit Wund- oder Ohrinfektionen in den Jahren
2013-2014 isoliert wurden.
Methoden und Materialien – MICs wurden mittels Agardilution fu €r h€aufig verwendete Medikamente bes-
timmt und mithilfe der Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) Breakpoints falls vorhanden, inter-
pretiert.
Ergebnisse – Von den 1676 gewonnenen Isolaten handelte es sich bei der haupts€ achlich isolierten Spezies
von Hunden um Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, gefolgt von Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas aerugi-
nosa und Escherichia coli. Bei Katzen wurden am h€ aufigsten Pasteurella multocida, Koagulase-negative
Staphylokokken (CoNS) und Staphylococcus aureus isoliert. Die Resistenzraten fu €r S. pseudintermedius
waren <26,7% fu €r Penicillin, Clindamycin und Chloramphenicol, und ≤11,5% fu €r Ampicillin, Amoxicillin/Cla-
vulans€aure, Cephalexin, Cefovecin, Gentamicin und Fluoroquinolone. Fu €r S. aureus reichten die Resistenz-
werte bis zu 90,9% fu€r b-Laktame, lagen bei 19,7% fu €r Clindamycin, bei 27% fu €r Fluoroquinolone und 0,0-
6,1% fu€r andere Medikamente. Das mecA Gen wurde mittels PCR bei 10,6% der S. pseudintermedius, bei
11,6% der CoNS und bei 31,4% der S. aureus Isolate best€ atigt. Bei Streptokokken/Enterokokken reichte
die Resistenz auf Penicillin, Ampicillin und Chloramphenicol von 0,0% bis 11,3%, w€ ahrend die Fluoroquino-
lon Resistenz zwischen 0,0% und 8,5% lag. Bei E.coli reichte die Resistenz auf Fluoroquinolone von 13,8
bis 15,9% und auf b-Laktame von 86,2% bis 100,0%. Es wurden niedrige Resistenzraten (0,0-6,3%) bei P.
multocida beobachtet und die Resistenz von P. aeruginosa auf Gentamicin lag bei 10,3%.
Schlussfolgerung – Insgesamt war die antimikrobielle Resistenz von kutanen/otischen Pathogenen, die
von Hunden und Katzen isoliert worden waren, niedrig (1-10%) bis moderat (10-20%). Fu €r mehrere Patho-
gene macht es der Mangel an CLSI schwierig Breakpoints zur tier€ arztlichen Verwendung zu empfehlen.

要約
背景 – ComPathプロジェクトは、標準法及び集中型最小発育阻止濃度（MIC）決定を用いた、犬及び猫の
病原菌の抗菌薬感受性モニタリングに特化した汎ヨーロッパプログラムである。
目的 – 本研究の目的は、2013〜2014年に皮膚、創傷、または耳感染症の急性臨床兆候を示した未治療動
物から分離された、主要な病原体の抗菌薬感受性を報告することであった。
材料と方法 – MIC値は、一般的に使用される薬物に対し、寒天希釈で決定し、可能であれば、Clinical and
Laboratory Standards Institute（CLSI）ブレークポイントを使用して解釈した。
結果 – 分離された1,676株のうち、犬から分離された主な種はStaphylococcus pseudintermediusで、続いてス
トレプトコッカス属、緑膿菌、および大腸菌であった。猫では、Pasteurella multocida、コアグラーゼ陰性
ブドウ球菌（CoNS）、S. aureusが最も頻繁に分離された。 S. pseudintermediusで観察された耐性率は、ペ
ニシリン、クリンダマイシン、クロラムフェニコールで26.7％未満、アンピシリン、アモキシシリン/ク
ラブラン酸、セファレキシン、セフォベシン、ゲンタマイシン、フルオロキノロンで11.5％以下であっ
た。S. aureusの耐性率は、b-ラクタム系抗菌薬で最大90.9％、クリンダマイシンで19.7％、フルオロキノ
ロンで27％、その他の薬物で0.0〜6.1％であった。 mecA遺伝子はPCR法により、S. pseudintermediusの
10.6％、CoNSの11.6％、およびS. aureusの分離株の31.4％に確認された。連鎖球菌/腸球菌では、ペニシリ
ン、アンピシリン及びクロラムフェニコールに対する耐性は0.0％から11.3％の範囲であったが、フルオ
ロキノロン耐性は0.0％から8.5％の範囲であった。大腸菌における耐性は、フルオロキノロンで13.8〜
15.9％、b-ラクタム系抗菌薬で86.2％〜100.0％の範囲であった。 P. multocidaで低い耐性率（0.0–6.3％）
が観察され、緑膿菌のゲンタマイシン耐性は10.3％であった。
結論 – 全体として、犬及び猫から分離された皮膚/耳の病原体の抗菌薬耐性は低く（1〜10％）中程度
（10〜20％）であった。いくつかの病原体にとって、獣医用のCLSI推奨ブレークポイント不足がボトル
ネックである。
de Jong et al.

摘要
背景 – ComPath是一个泛欧洲项目，致力于使用标准化方法和集中测定最小抑菌浓度(MIC)，监测犬和猫
病原体的抗菌药物敏感性。
目的 – 2013-2014年从有皮肤、伤口或耳部急性感染症状，但未治疗的动物身上分离主要病原体，报告其
抗菌药物敏感性。
方法和材料 – 通过琼脂稀释法测定常用药物的MIC，并使用临床和实验室标准协会(CLSI)断点（如有的
话）进行判读。
结果 – 在收集的1676个分离菌株中，犬的主要菌种为假中间型葡萄球菌，其次为链球菌属、铜绿假单胞菌
和大肠埃希菌。在猫身上，多杀巴氏杆菌、凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(CoNS)和金黄色葡萄球菌的分离频率最
高。观察耐药率，对于假中间型链球菌，青霉素、克林霉素和氯霉素的耐药率<26.7%，对氨苄西林、阿莫
西林/克拉维酸、头孢氨苄、头孢维星、庆大霉素和氟喹诺酮类的耐药率≤11.5%。对于金黄色葡萄球菌，
b-内酰胺类的耐药率高达90.9%，克林霉素的耐药率为19.7%，氟喹诺酮类的耐药率为27%，其他药物的耐
药率为0.0-6.1%。10.6%的假中间型链球菌、11.6%的CoNS和31.4%的金黄色葡萄球菌分离株经PCR证实存
在mecA基因。对于链球菌/肠球菌，青霉素、氨苄西林和氯霉素的耐药性范围为0.0%-11.3%，而氟喹诺酮
类的耐药性范围为0.0%-8.5%。对于大肠埃希菌，氟喹诺酮类的耐药率范围为13.8%-15.9%，b-内酰胺类的
耐药率范围为86.2%-100.0%。我们发现多杀巴氏杆菌的耐药率较低(0.0-6.3%)，对于铜绿假单胞菌，庆大
霉素的耐药率为10.3%。
结论 – 总体而言，从犬和猫身上分离的皮肤/耳道病原体的抗菌耐药性为低(1-10%)至中度(10-20%)。对于
几种病原体，缺乏CLSI推荐的兽医用断点是一个瓶颈。

Resumo
Contexto – O projeto ComPath e  um programa pan-europeu dedicado ao monitoramento da susceptibili-
dade a antimicrobianos de pato genos caninos e felinos utilizando me todos padronizados e determinacß~ ao
centralizada da concentracß~ao inibitoria mınima (MIC).
Objetivos – Relatar as suscetibilidades a antimicrobianos dos principais pato genos isolados de animais
n~ao tratados apresentando sinais clınicos agudos de pele, feridas ou infeccßo ~es de ouvido no perıodo de
2013–2014.
Me todos e materiais – Os MICs foram determinados por diluicß~ ao em agar para f
armacos comumente utili-
zados e interpretados usando pontos de corte do Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), se dis-
ponıveis.
Resultados – Dos 1.676 isolados recuperados, as principais espe cies isoladas de c~aes foram Staphylococ-
cus pseudintermedius, seguido por Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa e Escherichia coli. Em
gatos, Pasteurella multocida, estafilococos coagulase-negativos (CoNS) e Staphylococcus aureus foram
isolados com mais freque ^ncia. As taxas de resiste ^ncia observadas para S. pseudintermedius foram
<26,7% para penicilina, clindamicina e cloranfenicol e ≤11,5% para ampicilina, amoxicilina/clavulanato,
cefalexina, cefovecina, gentamicina e fluoroquinolonas. Para S. aureus, as taxas de resiste ^ncia variaram
ate 90,9% para b-lact^amicos e foram 19,7% para clindamicina, 27% para fluoroquinolonas e 0,0-6,1% para
outros medicamentos. O gene mecA foi confirmado por PCR em 10,6% dos isolados de S. pseudinterme-
dius, 11,6% dos CoNS e 31,4% dos isolados de S. aureus. Em estreptococos / enterococos, resiste ^ncia

a
penicilina,
a ampicilina e ao cloranfenicol variaram de 0,0% a 11,3%, enquanto a resiste ^ncia
as fluoroquino-
lonas variou de 0,0% a 8,5%. Para E. coli, a resiste ^ncia variou de 13,8 a 15,9% para fluoroquinolonas e de
86,2% a 100,0% para b-lact^amicos. Baixas taxas de resiste ^ncia (0,0–6,3%) foram observadas em P. multo-
cida, e para P. aeruginosa a resiste ^ncia
a gentamicina foi de 10,3%.
Conclusa ~o – No geral, a resiste ^ncia a antimicrobianos de pato genos cut^aneos/o ticos isolados de c~aes e
gatos foi baixa (1–10%) a moderada (10–20%). Para v genos, a escassez de pontos de corte reco-
arios pato
mendados pelo CLSI para uso veterinario e  um gargalo.

10 © 2020 ESVD and ACVD, Veterinary Dermatology