Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Chloramphenicol use for infections in 12 cats from 2015-2023
By Bruneau, Vanessa et al.·Published in Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery·2024·School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA, United States·View original on Crossref →
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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Retrospective description of the clinical use of chloramphenicol in client-owned cats: 12 cases (2015–2023)
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
Twelve cats with serious infections, including skin and urinary tract issues, were treated with an antibiotic called chloramphenicol when other oral antibiotics wouldn't work. Most of these cats had already tried other antibiotics without success. After receiving chloramphenicol for about two weeks, nine of the cats showed significant improvement or were completely cured. The side effects were minimal, mostly causing mild stomach upset that went away on its own or was easily managed. Overall, chloramphenicol proved to be an effective option for these challenging cases.
People also search for: cat skin infection treatment · chloramphenicol for cats · cat urinary tract infection antibiotics
Abstract
Objectives The study aimed to describe the clinical use of chloramphenicol in client-owned cats, examining the patient population, sites of infection, targeted pathogens, prescribed dosing regimen, outcomes and adverse effects. Methods Between 2015 and 2023, a retrospective medical record review was undertaken to identify a case series of cats treated with chloramphenicol. Results Twelve client-owned cats with complicated infections were treated with chloramphenicol at a median dose of 13.3 mg/kg (range 9.1–34.7) administered orally every 12 h for a median duration of 14.5 days. Within 30 days before starting chloramphenicol, 11/12 cats had received treatment with at least one antibiotic. The sites of infection included skin, urinary tract and multisystemic. Multidrug-resistant pathogens, for which no alternative oral antibiotic therapy was available, were commonly targeted. These included meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus species and multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Of the 12 cats treated with chloramphenicol, nine effectively achieved either bacteriologic or clinical cure. Chloramphenicol adverse effects were uncommon and limited to gastrointestinal upset, which was self-limiting or manageable with supportive treatment in two cats. Conclusions and relevance In these cats, the decision to treat with chloramphenicol was made because an alternative oral antibiotic was not available to target the multidrug-resistant pathogens. Infections of the skin or urinary tract were common. Overall, chloramphenicol was well tolerated, and treatment success was possible for most cats.
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 Crossref: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098612x241254024