Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Natural antimicrobial shampoo compared to antibiotics for dog skin
By Gmyterco, Vanessa Cunningham et al.·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2025·Department of Veterinary Medicine, Brazil·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparative study of a commercial formula containing natural antimicrobials versus oral cephalexin or topical chlorhexidine-miconazole therapies for treating superficial pyoderma in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 45 dogs with skin infections called superficial pyoderma was treated with three different therapies to see which worked best. One group received a shampoo and lotion made from natural ingredients, while another group was treated with a medicated shampoo, and the last group got an oral antibiotic. The dogs treated with the natural products showed less itching and fewer skin lesions compared to those on the antibiotic, and they had no side effects, while some dogs on the antibiotic had stomach issues. Overall, the natural treatment proved to be effective and safe, making it a good alternative to traditional antibiotics.
People also search for: dog skin infection treatment · natural remedies for dog pyoderma · cephalexin side effects in dogs
Abstract
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.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39780363/