Evidence Hub

Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in equine-associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yang L, Xie Y, Zhong G, Liu D, Zhu Y, Li J

BMC veterinary research, 2025

10 participants

Abstract

The escalating issue of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa), particularly in the equine context, poses a significant threat to veterinary and public health. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the current landscape of AMR in P. aeruginosa strains isolated from equine sources. Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted, and data from eligible studies were extracted and synthesized. The review included 10 articles reporting on 1624 P. aeruginosa isolates. High resistance rates were found for several antimicrobial classes, with particular concern for increasing resistance to imipenem, amikacin, and ceftiofur. The study also identifies significant temporal trends and regional variations in resistance patterns. Asia reported the highest average resistance rates, suggesting potential misuse of antimicrobials in the region. The most effective antimicrobials were found to be aztreonam, fosfomycin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftazidime. However, the generalizability of these findings is limited by the small number of eligible studies (n = 10) and the scarcity of isolates for certain antimicrobial classes. The findings of this review highlight the critical need for innovative strategies, stringent antimicrobial stewardship, and comprehensive risk assessment to combat the escalating threat of AMR in equine-associated P. aeruginosa and preserve the efficacy of our existing antimicrobial agents.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free