9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevalence of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus (VRE) in Companion Animals: The First Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Antimicrobial resistance in companion animals is a major public health concern worldwide due to the animals’ zoonotic potential and ability to act as a reservoir for resistant genes. We report on the first use of meta-analysis and a systematic review to analyze the prevalence of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) in companion animals. Databases such as MedLib, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched. The information was extracted by two independent reviewers and the results were reviewed by a third. Two reviewers independently assessed the study protocol using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist and the study quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for prevalence data. OpenMeta analyst and comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) were used for the meta-analysis. The random effect model was used, and publication bias was assessed using the Eggers test and funnel plot. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed, and the sources were analyzed using the leave-one-out meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and meta-regression. Twenty-two studies met the eligibility criteria, but because some studies reported the prevalence of VRE in more than one companion animal, they were considered as individual studies, and 35 studies were therefore added to the final meta-analysis. Sampling period of the included studies was from 1995–2018. Of the 4288 isolates tested in the included studies, 1241 were VRE. The pooled prevalence of VRE in companion animals was estimated at 14.6% (95% CI; 8.7–23.5%; I 2 = 97.10%; p < 0.001). Between-study variability was high ( t 2 = 2.859; heterogeneity I 2 = 97.10% with heterogeneity chi-square ( Q) = 1173.346, degrees of freedom (df) = 34, and p < 0.001). The funnel plot showed bias, which was confirmed by Eggers test ( t-value = 3.97165; p = 0.00036), and estimates from the leave-one-out forest plot did not affect the pooled prevalence. Pooled prevalence of VRE in dogs and cats were 18.2% (CI = 9.4–32.5%) and 12.3%, CI = 3.8–33.1%), respectively. More studies were reported in Europe than in any other continent, with most studies using feces as the sample type and disc diffusion as the detection method. With the emergence of resistant strains, new antimicrobials are required in veterinary medicine.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

          The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Closing the Gap between Methodologists and End-Users:Ras a Computational Back-End

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                antibiotics
                Antibiotics
                MDPI
                2079-6382
                31 January 2021
                February 2021
                : 10
                : 2
                : 138
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia; wadayusuf34@ 123456gmail.com (Y.W.); profahmad007@ 123456yahoo.com (A.A.I.); engkunursyafirah@ 123456gmail.com (E.N.S.E.A.R.); wardahyusofyaacob@ 123456gmail.com (W.Y.); leelihhuey@ 123456gmail.com (L.L.H.); azian@ 123456usm.my (A.H.); yeancyn@ 123456yahoo.com (C.Y.Y.)
                [2 ]Department of Zoology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria 810107, Nigeria
                [3 ]Microbiology Unit, Department of Biological Sciences, College of Natural and Applied Sciences, Summit University, Offa PMB 4412, Kwara State, Nigeria
                [4 ]Department of Chemical Science, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe PMB 0182, Gombe State, Nigeria; suwaibana@ 123456gmail.com
                [5 ]Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: drzaidah@ 123456usm.my ; Tel.: +60-169227344
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1779-9571
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3249-6357
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0034-7624
                Article
                antibiotics-10-00138
                10.3390/antibiotics10020138
                7911405
                33572528
                d919ad83-c97d-4c93-ba4a-0655ec243e71
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 27 December 2020
                : 26 January 2021
                Categories
                Article

                enterococcus,companion animals,vancomycin resistance,systematic review,meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article