Een complete benadering van kreupelheid en klauwaandoeningen bij melkkoeien. 
Door William Davy

Rundveedierenarts bij'Horizon Dairy Vets & Dairy Insight' (UK)
Hoofd van het ClawCare trainingscentrum op de Universiteit van Gent, 
RoMS gecertificeerde trainer.

 

Basisprincipes voor de behandeling en preventie van klauwaandoeningen bij rundvee.

Kreupelheid bij melkkoeien kan aanzienlijke kosten met zich meebrengen, met een gemiddelde van €179 tot €319 per geval, afhankelijk van de pariteit van de koe (Liang et al., 2017). De werkelijke kosten van kreupelheid of klauwaandoeningen worden echter vaak onderschat vanwege de vele gerelateerde kosten, zoals een verminderde reproductie en een verhoogd risico op stofwisselingsziekten.

Preventie, tijdige herkenning van kreupele dieren en een snelle en effectieve behandeling zijn de pijlers voor het behoud van een goede klauwgezondheid en het verminderen van de negatieve impact van kreupelheid op het welzijn van melkkoeien.

In dit artikel geven we in een notendop de basisprincipes weer, voor behandeling en preventie van klauwaandoeningen bij rundvee, die elke dierenarts zou moeten kennen om veehouders en hun dieren te ondersteunen.

Wat is kreupelheid?

Kreupelheid wordt over het algemeen gedefinieerd als elke abnormale beweging of houding van runderen, vaak als gevolg van pijn of disfunctie in de poten of klauwen. 

Kreupelheid varieert in ernst; van een verminderde symmetrie in de beweringen van de ledematen, tot het onvermogen om gewicht op een van de ledematen te dragen (Van Nuffel et al., 2015).

Klauwaandoeningen worden gezien als de meest voorkomende oorzaak van kreupelheid bij melkkoeien en komt voornamelijk voor aan de achterpoten. Indeling van de klauwaandoeningen is ruwweg in infectieuze en niet-infectieuze voetaandoeningen. 

Figuur 1 geeft een overzicht van de meest (maar niet beperkt tot) voorkomende klauwaandoeningen bij melkvee volgens de ICAR-classificatie.

Figure 1: overzicht van de meest voorkomende klauwaandoeningen bij melkvee volgens de ICAR-classificatie

Visuele locomotiescores

Eén van de grootste uitdagingen bij het visueel beoordelen van de motoriek, is de subjectieve interpretatie van de bewegingsindicatoren, wat vaak leidt tot inconsistenties of het onderschatten van de bewegingsscores.

Op dit moment zijn er diverse gevalideerde bewegingsscore-systemen beschikbaar. Het meest gebruikte scoringssysteem is aan de hand van een 5-puntsschaal (1-5, o.b.v. Sprecher et al. 1997), of een 4-puntsschaal (0-3, mobiliteitsscoresysteem van de 'Agriculture and Horticulture Board of Development'). 

Om betrouwbare en herhaalbare bewegingsscores te verkrijgen, moeten er een aantal praktische overwegingen in acht genomen worden:

  • Gebruik altijd hetzelfde scoringsssysteem
    Het scoringssysteem met een 5-puntsschaal (van Sprecher et al., 1997) vereist een statische en dynamische evaluatie, in tegenstelling tot het bewegingsscoresysteem dat alleen een dynamische evaluatie vereist.
  • Beoordeel de dieren op hetzelfde loopoppervlak.
    Het beste is om een vlakke, niet-gladde betonnen ondergrond te gebruiken.

  • Om verschillen tussen waarnemers te minimaliseren (oftewel om de perceptie-bias te verminderen), moet de beoordeling elke keer door dezelfde persoon of personen worden uitgevoerd.

  • Zorg voor regelmatige training van de beoordelaars om hoge normen te garanderen.

  • Bekijk achteraf ook de klauwen van beoordeelde dieren om te controleren op de aanwezigheid van klauwletsels.

De meest gebruikte bewegingskenmerken staan in Tabel 1.

Tabel 1: de meest gebruikte bewegingskenmerken bij rundvee. 

Early detection and prompt effective treatment (EDPET) in relation to animal welfare

Continuous monitoring of locomotion combined with routine preventive foot checks are the cornerstones of a successful lameness control plan on a dairy farm.

Additionally, early detection of lameness (= score >2/5 or >1/3, within 2 weeks of onset of lameness) and prompt effective treatment (<48 hours of lameness detection) are crucial to ensure adequate longterm recovery of foot lesions (primarily claw horn disruption lesions). Cows with imperfect mobility (Score 1/5 or 1/3) benefit from a foot check too.

Early lameness detection generally leads to treatment of lesions at an early stage which results in higher cure rates (= cow not lame 35 to 42 days after treatment) for non-infectious foot lesions ranging from 69 to 88% (Groenevelt et al., 2014; Thomas et al., 2015) compared to treatment of cows that are considered as chronically lame (Thomas et al., 2016) where on average only 15% returns to normal locomotion after treatment.

However, in practice the median interval between lameness recognition and treatment ranges between 28 to 65 days (Alawneh et al., 2012; Leach et al., 2012).

NSAIDs should be part of lameness treatment protocols on every dairy farm as they increase cure rates (cow returning to normal locomotion after a lameness event), reduce local inflammation and subsequent new bone growth (Newsome et al., 2016) and thus reduce the probability of lameness later in life (Wilson et al., 2022).

Pain management medication in dairy cattle is limited therefore it is crucial to focus on early lameness detection (reduce time spent lame as much as possible) and correct therapeutic protocols and supportive therapy to maintain dairy cow welfare at a high standard.

Current treatment and alternatives: Infectious foot lesions

Digital Dermatitis (DD or Mortellaro’s disease)

Digital Dermatitis lesions require a similar approach as infected wounds and the treatment protocols should be addressed accordingly:

  • Clean and debride DD lesions mechanically with gauze or water to remove manure, debris and any potential biofilm present. This step also facilitates proper lesion stage identification and registration. A hoof spreader is an essential tool to identify lesions in the deeper parts of the interdigital cleft.
  • Apply a topical antibacterial product on lesions that are visually considered as ‘active’ (M1, M2 and M4.1).
    • Chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline spray or thiamphenicol spray
    • Chelated copper and zinc gel or spray
    • Salicylic acid (has besides its anti-inflammatory capacity also some antibacterial effects)
  • Apply the primary layer of the bandage that is preferably non-occlusive to ensure wound healing and cause minimal trauma to the wound when removing the bandage.
  • Cover the primary layer with a large layer of synthetic cotton to prevent constriction of the foot by the tertiary layer. Apply a tertiary layer, generally consisting of a breathable cohesive bandage.
  • Optionally a fourth layer consisting of a protective tape can be added to ensure the bandage stays on for the desired period depending on the topical product used. This generally varies between 3-7 days.

Using bandages to treat DD has been shown to be advantageous in multiple field studies.

However, whether or not to apply bandages is primarily guided by managerial factors on a dairy farm. If there is reason to suspect that bandages will not be removed in time by farm staff, then it is advisable to limit your treatment protocol to repeated individual topical antibacterial spraying of active DD lesions.

An appropriate footbath protocol should be put in place as a preventive hygiene measure to control DD in heifers, dry cows and lactating cows. The use of footbaths as a treatment measure yields poor results.

Additionally cows that are lame due to active DD lesions (M1, M2 or M4.1 stages) are likely to benefit from a single parenteral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment such as ketoprofen to improve their recovery from lameness by 40% and reduce average milk yield losses by 2,98 kg compared to only using a topical product such as oxytetracycline spray and a wrap (Kasiora et al., 2022).

 

Interdigital phlegmon (IP)

Treatment success of interdigital phlegmon relies on the speed of therapy after onset of the disease.

Typical clinical signs to look for, are:

  • Fever (>39°C) in the acute stage of the disease. 
  • Severe lameness on the affected foot (reluctance to bear weight).
  • Swelling of the foot (typically bilateral swelling of heel bulbs and swelling of the dorsal part of the foot).

If IP is not treated in time, the skin in the interdigital cleft may burst open and give way to secondary infections by DD or infections of the deeper tissues and/or joints.

Treatment of IP consists of:

  • Systemic parenteral antibiotic and NSAID treatment for at least 1 week
    • First choice antibiotics:
      • Penicillin or Cefalexin
    • Second choice antibiotics:
      • Broad spectrum penicillins (such as amoxicillin or penicillin and dihydrostroptomycine)
      • Tylosine
      • Oxytetracycline
      • Tilmicosine
    • Third choice (local regulations may apply before use of these classes of antibiotics):
      • Cefquinome
      • Ceftiofur
    • NSAID:
      • Ketoprofen: every 24 hours
      • Carprofen: every 72 hours
      • Meloxicam: every 48 hours
  • Foot check to ensure there are no other lesions present on the affected foot
    • If other lesions are present, treat accordingly
    • Local topical treatment if skin in the interdigital space has rupture
  • Follow-up to ensure lesion is healing properly
    • Clinical improvement should be seen within 2 days, if there is no improvement (i.e. cow still lame) then a thorough foot inspection is needed in a foot trimming crush. 

Current treatment and alternatives: Non-infectious foot lesions

The treatment options for non-infectious foot lesions (commonly called claw horn disruption lesions, CHDLs) are limited and therapy success is often dictated by the interval between the onset of lameness and treatment.

Ideally, treatment is performed within 2 weeks after onset of lameness. General guidelines are to treat lame cows (mobilityscore 2/3) within 48 hours and severely lame cows (mobility score 3/3) within 24 hours.

Based on the findings of the randomised clinical control trial performed by (Thomas et al., 2015), the current standard for CHDL treatment is therapeutic trimming, a block on the healthy partner hoof and supportive therapy by a systemic NSAID treatment (ketoprofen every 24 hours for 3 days ).

The addition of parenteral NSAID therapy increases recovery rates by 20,2% after 5 weeks  compared to the traditional therapeutic trimming and block treatment.

Treatment of CHDLs generally consists of alleviating the interaction between the affected hoof and the walking surfaces:

  • Curative functional hoof trimming to identify the location and severity of the lesion. The use of a hoof tester is an indispensable asset to identify pain in a hoof where lesion are not clearly visible (yet). Reduce the heel of the affected hoof as much as possible without breeching the hoof horn and exposing the corium. The latter facilitates in visualizing lesions that are close to the corium.
  • Apply a block to the healthy hoof on the same foot to relieve the affected hoof. 
  • If proliferative lesions are present (sole ulcer or white line defect), reduce the surrounding horn as much as possible until it flexes under slight finger pressure. Sometimes corium can be affected by a secondary bacterial colonization (DD-associated lesions). These need to be surgically debrided after intravenous regional anaesthesia. Remove all the affected corium and apply a compression bandage with an antibacterial spray (CTC spray) or antiseptic product.  

Dynamic & pro-active approach at herd level 

An effective lameness prevention program on a dairy herd relies on multiple crucial measures that require:

  • Periodic preventive foot checks:
    These are often scheduled in function of the days in milk. The most common time periods are after peak lactation (around 100 days in milk) and at dry-off. However, these need to be adjusted in function of the lactation cycle of a cow, the type of farm and the environment of a farm. Routine foot checks and trimming need to be performed by a skilled staff member or skilled foot trimmer.
  • Continuous lameness monitoring:
    Early lameness detection and prompt effective treatment are crucial to prevent lesions from becoming chronic. Ideally, visual locomotion scoring is performed every 2 weeks by a trained and calibrated observer in an independent manner to maximally reduce bias.
  • Effective treatment protocols for lame cows:
    Lame cows should be treated as soon as possible or ultimately within 48 hours after detection. Treatment should be performed by a skilled staff member or external professional with a therapeutic trim, block and NSAIDs. Treatment protocols for IFLs (antibiotics) and NIFLs (NSAIDs) need to be discussed and set in place with the farm veterinary team to guarantee regulated access to the required veterinary products.
  • Controlling infection pressure of IFLs and preventing new infections:
    Regular footbathing  or other preventive measures  need to be applied in all lactation stages (lactating cows, dry cows and young stock). Good leg cleanliness  (identified by leg hygiene scores) helps to reduce the spread of IFLs by ensuring dry and clean skin on the feet and legs.
  • Optimize and invest in cow comfort:
    Every second a cow is not standing on concrete, is a second she is less likely to develop a foot lesion. Properly adjusted cubicle dimensions and bedding surfaces ensure sufficient lying times and decrease the risk for foot lesions and concomitant lameness. Overstocking should be avoided at all times or kept to a minimum due to the deleterious effect on cow and farm time budgets.
    Optimizing milking times and reducing time out of pen are two other key metrics that can be used to  reduce the forces on a cow’s foot and the subsequent exposure to concrete. 
    Parlour sizes and milking routine should be matched to milking group sizes or vice versa, to ensure time out of pen is kept to a reasonable 50 to 70 minutes per milking.

 

Alawneh, J.I., R.A. Laven, and M.A.Stevenson. 2012. Interval between detection of lameness by locomotion scoring and treatment for lameness: A survival analysis. Veterinary Journal 193:622–625. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.06.042.

Groenevelt, M., D.C.J. Main, D. Tisdall, T.G. Knowles, and N.J. Bell. 2014. Measuring the response to therapeutic foot trimming in dairy cows with fortnightly lameness 
scoring. Veterinary Journal 201:283–288. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.05.017.

Kasiora, K., A. Anagnostopoulos, C. Bedford, T. Menka, M. Barden, B.E. Griffiths, D. Achard, K. Timms, V.S. Machado, A. Coates, and G. Oikonomou. 2022. Evaluation of the use of ketoprofen for the treatment of digital dermatitis in dairy cattle: A randomised, positive controlled, clinical trial. Veterinary Record 190. doi:10.1002/vetr.977.

Leach, K.A., D.A. Tisdall, N.J. Bell, D.C.J. Main, and L.E. Green. 2012. The effects of early treatment for hindlimb lameness in dairy cows on four commercial UK farms. Veterinary Journal 193:626–632. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.06.043.

Liang, D., L.M. Arnold, C.J. Stowe, R.J. Harmon, and J.M. Bewley. 2017. Estimating US dairy clinical disease costs with a stochastic simulation model. J Dairy Sci 100:1472–1486. doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11565.

Newsome, R., M.J. Green, N.J. Bell, M.G.G. Chagunda, C.S. Mason, C.S. Rutland, C.J. Sturrock, H.R. Whay, and J.N. Huxley. 2016. Linking bone development on the caudal aspect of the distal phalanx with lameness during life. J Dairy Sci 99:4512–4525. doi: 10.3168/jds.2015-10202.

Van Nuffel, A., I. Zwertvaegher, L. Pluym, S. Van Weyenberg, V.M. Thorup, M. Pastell, B. Sonck, and W. Saeys. 2015. Lameness detection in dairy cows: Part 1. How to distinguish between non-lame and lame cows based on differences in locomotion or behavior. Animals 5:838–860. doi:10.3390/ani5030387.

Sprecher, D.J., D.E. Hostetler’, and J.B. Kaneene. 1997. A LAMENESS SCORING SYSTEM THAT USES POSTURE  AND GAIT TO PREDICT DAIRY CATTLE REPRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE.

Thomas, H.J., G.G. Miguel-Pacheco, N.J. Bollard, S.C. Archer, N.J. Bell, C. Mason, O.J.R. Maxwell, J.G. Remnant, P. Sleeman, H.R. Whay, and J.N. Huxley. 2015. Evaluation of treatments for claw horn lesions in dairy cows in a randomized controlled trial. J Dairy Sci 98:4477–4486. doi:10.3168/jds.2014-8982.

Thomas, H.J., J.G. Remnant, N.J. Bollard, A. Burrows, H.R. Whay, N.J. Bell, C. Mason, and J.N. Huxley. 2016. Recovery of chronically lame dairy cows following treatment for claw horn lesions: A randomised controlled trial. Veterinary Record 178:116. doi:10.1136/vr.103394.

Wilson, J.P., M.J. Green, L. V. Randall, C.S. Rutland, N.J. Bell, H. Hemingway-Arnold, J.S. Thompson, N.J. Bollard, and J.N. Huxley. 2022. Effects of routine treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs at calving and when lame on the future probability of lameness and culling in dairy cows: A randomized controlled trial. J Dairy Sci 105:6041–6054. doi:10.3168/jds.2021-21329.
 

Downloads 

keyboard_arrow_up