Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): antimicrobial‐resistant Enterococcus faecalis in poultry. (21st February 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nielsen, Søren Saxmose; Bicout, Dominique Joseph; Calistri, Paolo; Canali, Elisabetta; Drewe, Julian Ashley; Garin‐Bastuji, Bruno; Gonzales Rojas, José Luis; Gortázar, Christian; Herskin, Mette; Michel, Virginie; Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel; Padalino, Barbara; Pasquali, Paolo; Roberts, Helen Clare; Spoolder, Hans; Ståhl, Karl; Velarde, Antonio; Viltrop, Arvo; Winckler, Christoph; Baldinelli, Francesca; Broglia, Alessandro; Kohnle, Lisa; Alvarez, Julio
• Is Part Of: EFSA journal. Volume 20:Number 2(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-02-21
• Subjects: antimicrobial resistance -- Enterococcus faecalis -- Animal Health Law -- listing -- categorisation -- impact; Food -- Europe -- Safety measures -- Periodicals; Food Safety; Food -- Safety measures; Europe; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Government Publications, International; Internet Resources; Periodicals; Periodicals; 363.19209405
• DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7127
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1831-4732

Abstract

Abstract: Enterococcus faecalis ( E. faecalis ) was identified among the most relevant antimicrobial‐resistant (AMR) bacteria in the EU for poultry in a previous scientific opinion. Thus, it has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as in Article 9 and Article 8 for listing animal species related to the bacterium. The assessment has been performed following a methodology previously published. The outcome is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with uncertain outcome. According to the assessment here performed, it is uncertain whether AMR E. faecalis can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (33–66% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that the bacterium does not meet the criteria in Sections 1, 2 and 4 (Categories A, B and D; 0–5%, 5–10% and 1–10% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively) and the AHAW Panel is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 3 and 5 (Categories C and E, 33–66% and 33–66% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively). The animal species to be listed for AMR E. faecalis according to Article 8 criteria are mostly birds of the orders Galliformes and Anseriformes, but also mammals and reptiles can serve as reservoirs.