Background: Acute otitis externa is a common multi-factorial disorder in the dog. Several topical preparations are available on the veterinary market, which are licensed for an either specified duration of treatment o...Background: Acute otitis externa is a common multi-factorial disorder in the dog. Several topical preparations are available on the veterinary market, which are licensed for an either specified duration of treatment or for a discretionary period that is determined by the clinician. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of two topical products, both licensed for the treatment of otitis externa in the dog, but with different treatment durations. Animal Population: One hundred and sixty dogs were enrolled in this multicentre field study from which 157 dogs were analysed in the Per Protocol sample (73 Aurizon?treated animals and 84 Easotic?treated animals). Method: Dogs were randomly assigned to Aurizon?or Easotic?treatment groups. Aurizon?(Vétoquinol SA: marbofloxacin, clotrimazole, dexamethasone) was administered daily in the affected ear(s) for 7 or 14 days, and was compared with a daily administration of Easotic?(Virbac SAS: gentamicin, miconazole, hydrocortisone aceponate) for 5 days. General and localised clinical signs were scored on days 0 (D0), 3 (D3), 7 (D7), 14 (D14) and 21 (D21). Results: Clinical cure rates at the end of treatment were 56.3% and 48.8% (p=0.35) in the Aurizon?and Easotic?groups respectively and 81.2% versus 74.7% one week after completing the course of treatment (p = 0.34). Twenty-one days after initially presenting for the study, cure rates were 84.3% in the Aurizon?group and 73.8% in the Easotic?(p=0.12). A relationship between severity of clinical signs and treatment duration was observed. Conclusion and Clinical Significance: At the end of the trial period, cure rates showed a tendency to be higher in the Aurizon?treated animals. The flexible dosage and the veterinary monitoring permitted treatment duration to be adjusted based upon the severity of otitis externa thus increasing the likelihood of clinical cure.展开更多
Ear cleaning is a therapeutic component in the management of otitis externa in dogs. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the in vivo efficacy and safety of a new ear cleanser, Sonotix? against EpiOtic? Advan...Ear cleaning is a therapeutic component in the management of otitis externa in dogs. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the in vivo efficacy and safety of a new ear cleanser, Sonotix? against EpiOtic? Advanced for the management of canine otitis externa. Eighteen clients owned dogs with a diagnosis of erythemato-ceruminous or purulent otitis externa were prospectively included and randomized to two treatment group: EpiOtic? Advanced and Sonotix?. Cytology and video-otoscopic examination (erythema, amount of cerumen and thickness and surface of ear canal covered by cerumen) of all affected ears were done at D0, both before (T0) and 30 minutes (T0 + 30 min) after ear cleaning. Then an ear medication was applied (Aurizon?, Vetoquinol). Owners were instructed to clean affected ears daily and apply the ear medication 30 minutes later for 5 days (D1-D5). Dogs were seen again at D6 for cytology and video-otoscopic examination. At T0, no significant differences were found between both ear cleansers groups regarding macroscopic and microscopic scorings. At T0 + 30 min and D6 cytological and video-otoscopic scores were significantly decreased (Wilcoxon test;p < 0.01) compared to baseline in both groups. However, the cleaning activity of Sonotix? was statistically superior to Epiotic? as evidenced by the median global scores of video-otoscopic examination at T0 + 30 min (Mann Whitney Test, p < 0.01). Effective ear cleaning is an essential part of any treatment scheme because it favours the contact between the ointment and the lining ear epidermis and speeds resolution by the removal of cerumen, microbial organisms and cellular debris. In our study, the important reductions in yeast, cocci, and rod-shaped organism counts were demonstrated in smears at T0 + 30 min and D6 in both groups. Video-otoscopic examination performed 30 minutes after ear cleaning suggests that Sonotix? seems to be more effective in removing cerumen than EpiOtic? Advanced.展开更多
文摘Background: Acute otitis externa is a common multi-factorial disorder in the dog. Several topical preparations are available on the veterinary market, which are licensed for an either specified duration of treatment or for a discretionary period that is determined by the clinician. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of two topical products, both licensed for the treatment of otitis externa in the dog, but with different treatment durations. Animal Population: One hundred and sixty dogs were enrolled in this multicentre field study from which 157 dogs were analysed in the Per Protocol sample (73 Aurizon?treated animals and 84 Easotic?treated animals). Method: Dogs were randomly assigned to Aurizon?or Easotic?treatment groups. Aurizon?(Vétoquinol SA: marbofloxacin, clotrimazole, dexamethasone) was administered daily in the affected ear(s) for 7 or 14 days, and was compared with a daily administration of Easotic?(Virbac SAS: gentamicin, miconazole, hydrocortisone aceponate) for 5 days. General and localised clinical signs were scored on days 0 (D0), 3 (D3), 7 (D7), 14 (D14) and 21 (D21). Results: Clinical cure rates at the end of treatment were 56.3% and 48.8% (p=0.35) in the Aurizon?and Easotic?groups respectively and 81.2% versus 74.7% one week after completing the course of treatment (p = 0.34). Twenty-one days after initially presenting for the study, cure rates were 84.3% in the Aurizon?group and 73.8% in the Easotic?(p=0.12). A relationship between severity of clinical signs and treatment duration was observed. Conclusion and Clinical Significance: At the end of the trial period, cure rates showed a tendency to be higher in the Aurizon?treated animals. The flexible dosage and the veterinary monitoring permitted treatment duration to be adjusted based upon the severity of otitis externa thus increasing the likelihood of clinical cure.
文摘Ear cleaning is a therapeutic component in the management of otitis externa in dogs. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the in vivo efficacy and safety of a new ear cleanser, Sonotix? against EpiOtic? Advanced for the management of canine otitis externa. Eighteen clients owned dogs with a diagnosis of erythemato-ceruminous or purulent otitis externa were prospectively included and randomized to two treatment group: EpiOtic? Advanced and Sonotix?. Cytology and video-otoscopic examination (erythema, amount of cerumen and thickness and surface of ear canal covered by cerumen) of all affected ears were done at D0, both before (T0) and 30 minutes (T0 + 30 min) after ear cleaning. Then an ear medication was applied (Aurizon?, Vetoquinol). Owners were instructed to clean affected ears daily and apply the ear medication 30 minutes later for 5 days (D1-D5). Dogs were seen again at D6 for cytology and video-otoscopic examination. At T0, no significant differences were found between both ear cleansers groups regarding macroscopic and microscopic scorings. At T0 + 30 min and D6 cytological and video-otoscopic scores were significantly decreased (Wilcoxon test;p < 0.01) compared to baseline in both groups. However, the cleaning activity of Sonotix? was statistically superior to Epiotic? as evidenced by the median global scores of video-otoscopic examination at T0 + 30 min (Mann Whitney Test, p < 0.01). Effective ear cleaning is an essential part of any treatment scheme because it favours the contact between the ointment and the lining ear epidermis and speeds resolution by the removal of cerumen, microbial organisms and cellular debris. In our study, the important reductions in yeast, cocci, and rod-shaped organism counts were demonstrated in smears at T0 + 30 min and D6 in both groups. Video-otoscopic examination performed 30 minutes after ear cleaning suggests that Sonotix? seems to be more effective in removing cerumen than EpiOtic? Advanced.
