ESTONIAESTONIA The Report referred to in Article 9 of Directive 2003/ 99/ EC TRENDS AND SOURCES OF...

ESTONIA

The Report referred to in Article 9 of Directive 2003/ 99/ EC

TRENDS AND SOURCES OF ZOONOSES ANDZOONOTIC AGENTS IN HUMANS, FOODSTUFFS, ANIMALS ANDFEEDINGSTUFFS

including information on foodborne outbreaks, antimicrobialresistance in zoonotic agents and some pathogenicmicrobiological agents

IN 2006

INFORMATION ON THE REPORTING AND MONITORING SYSTEMCountry: EstoniaReporting Year: 2006Institutions and laboratories involved in reporting and monitoring:Laboratory name Description ContributionVeterinary andFood Board (VFB)

The Veterinary and Food Board, agovernmental agency carrying out itstasks under the government of theMinistry of Agriculture, functions as asupervising body and ensures that therequirements of the legislation thatgoverns animal health, food safety,market regulation, animal welfare andfarm animal breeding are followed.Veterinary and Food Board isresponsible for state control of all foodprocessing, wholesale and food storagebusinesses. Coordinates themonitoring of zoonoses in Estonia.

Responsible for reporting on trendsand sources of zoonoses. Data onzoonotic agents in animals, food andfeed, antimicrobial resistance data onisolates from animals and food.

Veterinary andFood Laboratory(VFL)

Veterinary and Food Laboratorycarries out statutory testing undervarious farm animal diseasesurveillance and food safety controlprograms and laboratory testing ofimported and exported animals andrelevant goods.

Data on zoonotic agents in animals,food and feed, antimicrobial resistancedata on isolates from animals andfood.

EstonianAgriculturalRegisters andInformation Board(ARIB)

The Estonian Agricultural Registersand Information Board is agovernmental institution subordinatedto the Ministry of Agriculture. ARIB`sfunctions are to maintain the registerof farm animals as well as the registerof agricultural supports andagricultural parcels and to allocatedifferent agricultural, fishery and ruraldevelopment supports. ARIB alsoimplements the EU agricultural marketregulation measures and milk quotasystem.

Susceptible animal population data.

Estonia 2006 Report on trends and sources of zoonoses

Estonia 2006

Health ProtectionInspectorate (HPI)

Health Protection Inspectorate is agovernmental institution under thesubordination of the Ministry of SocialAffairs. The area of its activityincludes state supervision over thesafety of foodstuffs transferred to thefinal consumer and their handling onretail establishments; epidemiologicalsurveillance; prevention and control ofcommunicable diseases; investigationof the circumstances of infectiontransmission; monitoring andsupervision over the organization ofimmunization of population.

Data on zoonotic agents in food atretail level, on human zoonoses and onfoodborne outbreaks. Alsoantimicrobial resistance data onisolates from humans.

Plant ProductionInspectorate (PPI)

The plant Production Inspectorate is anagency under the aegis of the Ministryof Agriculture. It functions as asupervising body and ensures that therequirements of the legislation thatgoverns plant health, plant protectionproducts, feedingstuffs, fertilisers,seeds and plant propagating material,variety listing and plant breedersrights, organic production and freshfruits and vegetables (external qualitystandards) are followed.

Data on zoonotic agents in feed.


Estonia 2006

PREFACEThis report is submitted to the European Commission in accordance with Article 9 of Council Directive 2003/ 99/ EC1. The information has also been forwarded to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The report contains information on trends and sources of zoonoses and zoonotic agents in Estonia during theyear 2006. The information covers the occurrence of these diseases and agents in humans, animals, foodstuffsand in some cases also in feedingstuffs. In addition the report includes data on antimicrobial resistance in somezoonotic agents and commensal bacteria as well as information on epidemiological investigations of foodborneoutbreaks. Complementary data on susceptible animal populations in the country is also given. The information given covers both zoonoses that are important for the public health in the whole EuropeanCommunity as well as zoonoses, which are relevant on the basis of the national epidemiological situation. The report describes the monitoring systems in place and the prevention and control strategies applied in thecountry. For some zoonoses this monitoring is based on legal requirements laid down by the CommunityLegislation, while for the other zoonoses national approaches are applied. The report presents the results of the examinations carried out in the reporting year. A national evaluation of theepidemiological situation, with special reference to trends and sources of zoonotic infections, is given.Whenever possible, the relevance of findings in foodstuffs and animals to zoonoses cases in humans isevaluated. The information covered by this report is used in the annual Community Summary Report on zoonoses that ispublished each year by EFSA.

1 Directive 2003/ 99/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2003 on the monitoring ofzoonoses and zoonotic agents, amending Decision 90/ 424/ EEC and repealing Council Directive 92/ 117/ EEC, OJ L 325,17.11.2003, p. 31


Estonia 2006

LIST OF CONTENTS1. ANIMAL POPULATIONS 12. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC ZOONOSES AND ZOONOTIC AGENTS 32.1. SALMONELLOSIS 42.1.1. General evaluation of the national situation 42.1.2. Salmonellosis in humans 62.1.3. Salmonella in foodstuffs 62.1.4. Salmonella in animals 402.1.5. Salmonella in feedingstuffs 612.1.6. Salmonella serovars and phagetype distribution 642.1.7. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella isolates 692.2. CAMPYLOBACTERIOSIS 942.2.1. General evaluation of the national situation 942.2.2. Campylobacteriosis in humans 952.2.3. Campylobacter in foodstuffs 952.2.4. Campylobacter in animals 1012.2.5. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter isolates 1042.3. LISTERIOSIS 1082.3.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1082.3.2. Listeriosis in humans 1092.3.3. Listeria in foodstuffs 1102.3.4. Listeria in animals 1202.4. E. COLI INFECTIONS 1212.4.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1212.4.2. E. Coli Infections in humans 1222.4.3. Escherichia coli, pathogenic in foodstuffs 1222.4.4. Escherichia coli, pathogenic in animals 1242.5. TUBERCULOSIS, MYCOBACTERIAL DISEASES 1272.5.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1272.5.2. Tuberculosis, Mycobacterial Diseases in humans 1292.5.3. Mycobacterium in animals 1292.6. BRUCELLOSIS 1362.6.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1362.6.2. Brucellosis in humans 1372.6.3. Brucella in foodstuffs 1372.6.4. Brucella in animals 1372.7. YERSINIOSIS 1472.7.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1472.7.2. Yersiniosis in humans 1482.7.3. Yersinia in foodstuffs 1482.7.4. Yersinia in animals 1492.8. TRICHINELLOSIS 1502.8.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1502.8.2. Trichinellosis in humans 1512.8.3. Trichinella in animals 151


Estonia 2006

2.9. ECHINOCOCCOSIS 1562.9.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1562.9.2. Echinococcosis in humans 1572.9.3. Echinococcus in animals 1572.10. TOXOPLASMOSIS 1582.10.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1582.10.2. Toxoplasmosis in humans 1592.10.3. Toxoplasma in animals 1592.11. RABIES 1602.11.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1602.11.2. Lyssavirus (rabies) in animals 1622.12. QFEVER 1682.12.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1682.12.2. Coxiella (Qfever) in animals 1682.13. CYSTICERCOSIS, TAENIOSIS 1692.13.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1692.13.2. Cysticerci in animals 169

3. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC INDICATORS OF ANTIMICROBIALRESISTANCE

172

3.1. ESCHERICHIA COLI, NONPATHOGENIC 1733.1.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1733.1.2. Antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli, nonpathogenic isolates 174

4. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC MICROBIOLOGICAL AGENTS 1804.1. HISTAMINE 1814.1.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1814.1.2. Histamine in foodstuffs 1824.2. ENTEROBACTER SAKAZAKII 1844.2.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1844.2.2. Enterobacter sakazakii in foodstuffs 1854.3. STAPHYLOCOCCAL ENTEROTOXINS 1874.3.1. General evaluation of the national situation 1874.3.2. Staphylococcal enterotoxins in foodstuffs 188

5. FOODBORNE OUTBREAKS 189


Estonia 2006

1. ANIMAL POPULATIONS

The relevance of the findings on zoonoses and zoonotic agents has to be related to the size and nature of theanimal population in the country.

A. Information on susceptible animal population

Sources of information:

Estonian Veterinary and Food Board and Estonian Agricultural Registers and Information Board.

Dates the figures relate to and the content of the figures:

All the figures provided are from December 31, 2006.

National evaluation of the numbers of susceptible population and trends in these figures:

The number of susceptible population has been quite stable recently. The data presented in the table includes backyard animals.

Geographical distribution and size distribution of the herds, flocks and holdings

The highest cattle population density is in the middlepart of Estonia (Järva county) and the biggestpig farm is situated in the Viljandi county. The highest poultry flocks density is in the northern part ofEstonia (Harjumaa county).


Estonia 2006 1

Table Susceptible animal populations

* Only if different than current reporting yearAnimal species Category of

animalsNumber of herds orflocks

Number of holdings Number ofslaughtered animals

Livestock numbers(live animals)

Year* Year* Year* Year*Bears wild 18Cattle (bovineanimals)

mixed herds 896 913 2076 4568

dairy cows andheifers

7418 7561 33564 161796

meat productionanimals

1319 1353 1193 10658

calves (under 1year)

5490 5502 8725 69197

in total 9267 8748 63915 252717Deer farmed in total 53Ducks meat production

flocks 1151 1151 6810

in total 1151 1151 6810Gallus gallus(fowl)

breeding flocks formeat productionline in total

16 1 21000 41000

laying hens 3487 3487 448685 968245broilers 107 40 7439275 1401896in total 3610 3528 7908960 2411141

Geese meat productionflocks

962 962 3772

in total 962 962 3772Goats mixed herds 407 410 297 1971

animals under 1year

109 109 45 285

animals over 1 year 398 401 252 1686in total 407 410 297 1971

Ostriches farmed 32 32 4 263

Pigs mixed herds 80 80 281539 114071breeding animals 10 10 10124 24954fattening pigs 35 35 101687 101687in total 125 125 393350 240712

Rabbits farmed 1556 1556 690 8601Reindeers farmed in total 2223Sheep animals under 1

year (lambs) 1159 1161 6212 17991

animals over 1 year 1782 1815 7376 38886in total 1832 1874 13588 56877

Solipeds, domestic horses in total 951 951 14 5856

Turkeys meat productionflocks

165 165 809

in total 165 165 809Wild boars wild 1807

Quails in total 43 43 8683 17212

Pheasants in total 44 44 1893

Footnote

Ducks, geese, turkeys, pheasants there is no official data on number of slaughtered animals. Only backyard poultry ispresent in the country and poultry is not slaughtered on the approved establishments.


Estonia 2006 2

2. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC ZOONOSES AND ZOONOTICAGENTS

Zoonoses are diseases or infections, which are naturally transmissible directly or indirectly between animals andhumans. Foodstuffs serve often as vehicles of zoonotic infections. Zoonotic agents cover viruses, bacteria,fungi, parasites or other biological entities that are likely to cause zoonoses.


Estonia 2006 3

2.1. SALMONELLOSIS

2.1.1. General evaluation of the national situation

A. General evaluation

History of the disease and/ or infection in the country

Surveillance of salmonellosis in human population is undertaken by the Health ProtectionInspectorate.Data show that human salmonellosis is the most frequently reported disease in Estonia. Moreover, themajority of cases have acquired the infection in Estonia. Thus, salmonellosis is an important zoonoticdisease in Estonia.

National evaluation of the recent situation, the trends and sources of infection

Surveillance of salmonella in feed, animals and food is carried out in Estonia for many years. Inaddition to the surveillance systems, monitoring programmes are conducted and they provideadditional epidemiological information.The State Programme on Monitorning and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases is in place. Thedata received in the frames of this programme shows that the prevalent Salmonella serotype isolatedfrom cattle were S.Typhimurium, S.Reading and S.Dublin (in 2005 S.Typhimurium and S.Dublin, in2004 S.Dublin and S.group C). S.Enteritidis (in 2005 S.Typhimurium, in 2004 S.Stanleyville)was the predominant serotype isolated from pigs and S.Enteritidis is the only serotype isolated frompoultry (Gallus gallus) during years.No turkey, geese and duck flocks are present in Estonia.The official surveillance programme documents no presence of Salmonella in feed materials andfeedingstuffs examined in Estonia during years. In 2002 the Estonian Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin has been startedand is approved annually by the Director General of the Veterinary and Food Board. Food of animalorigin is sampled and analyzed according to the requirements of the programme. In addition foodsamples are taken in the frames of official surveillance programmes of Veterinary and Food Boardand Health Protection Inspectorate.3050 samples of meat and meat products has been tested in 2006, 33 (1,1 %) of them were positive(2004 0,8 %, 2005 1,4 %). 60 % (2004 38,8 %, 2005 58,3 %) of all positive meat samplescompose fresh broiler meat. The predominant isolates were S.Enteritidis (18 samples) andS.Typhimurium (4 samples).There were no positive samples of milk, milk products in 2006. Among other food products 2 samples (salads) were Salmonella positive in 2006.The overall prevalence of Salmonella in foodstuffs is about 0,79 % (2004 0,5 %, 2005 0,8 %).Antimicrobial resistance:Salmonella isolates from foodstuffs tested for antibiotic resistance are collected in the frames ofmonitoring or surveillance programmes. In 2006 54 Salmonella spp. isolates were tested in the frames of the project Antimicrobial ResistanceMonitoring of Zoonotic Agents isolated from animals. 33 isolates originated from animal clinicalmaterial, 21 from food of animal origin. Investigations were performed by the Veterinary and FoodLaboratory.


Estonia 2006 4

The number of human cases of salmonellosis are increasing since the year 2004. In 2005 the numberof cases increased 2 times in comparison with the year 2004 and in 2006 the number of casesincreased 1,5 times in comparison with the year 2005. The predominant causative agent ofsalmonellosis in humans is S.Enteritidis. Young children are more exposed to the illness in Estonia,especially children from 1 to 4 years old. 5 general outbreaks and 14 family outbreaks of salmonellosis has been registered in the year 2006 (in2005 1 general outbreak and 16 family outbreaks). In approximately all cases Salmonella enteritidiswas the causative agent of the outbreak.

Relevance of the findings in animals, feedingstuffs and foodstuffs to human cases (as asource of infection)

Salmonella infection in humans is mostly foodborne. In most cases the relevance of human cases tofoodstuffs is determined on the basis of epidemiological investigation. The examination is usuallycomplicated due to small quantities of food batches, which are usually consumed before theexamination starts.Transmission from an infected person to person is possible. Salmonella Enteritidis is the predominant agent discovered in food and humans. SalmonellaTyphimurium is on the second position among the other serotypes isolated from food and humans.Salmonella Typhimurium is the predominant agent discovered in cattle and Salmonella Enteritidis isthe predominant agent isolated from pigs in 2006. Salmonella Enteritidis is the only serovardiscovered in poultry.


Estonia 2006 5

2.1.2. Salmonellosis in humans

2.1.3. Salmonella in foodstuffs

A. Salmonella spp. in eggs and egg products

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Eggs at packing centres and egg products at production plants are sampled by the Veterinaryand Food Board officials according to the Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food ofAnimal Origin (SMPF) and in the frames of official food surveillance sampling plans.At retail sampling of table eggs and egg products is performed in accordance with the HealthProtection Inspectorate annual plan as a part of official food control. Sampling in the frames of SMPF and official food control is performed randomly. Targetedsampling is preformed in cases of suspicion, consumer complains etc.In addition to official monitoring and surveillance plans, every food business operator has theobligation to take samples in the frames of self control programmes.

Frequency of the sampling

Eggs at egg packing centres (foodstuff based approach)

Sampling distributed evenly throughout the year

Eggs at retail


Egg products (at production plant and at retail)


Type of specimen taken


Mixture of yolk and white

Eggs at retail

Mixture of yolk and white


Egg products: dried egg products etc.

Methods of sampling (description of sampling techniques)



Estonia 2006 6

Eggs are sampled randomly. Sample taken 5 eggs, sample analyzed 25 g mixture ofyolk and white. Samples are stored at +2+4C and analyzed as soon as possible.

Eggs at retail

Sample analyzed 25 g mixture of egg yolk and white. Samples are stored at +2+4Cand analyzed as soon as possible.

Raw material for egg products (at production plant)

Sampling is random. Sample analyzed 25 g. Samples are stored at +2+4C andanalyzed as soon as possible.


Egg products are sampled randomly. Sample analyzed 25 g.

Definition of positive finding


A sample where Salmonella spp. has been isolated.

Eggs at retail






Diagnostic/ analytical methods used


Bacteriological method: ISO 6579:2003 Cor.1 2004

Eggs at retail

Bacteriological method: ISO 6579:2003





Control program/ mechanisms


Estonia 2006 7

The control program/ strategies in place

Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) is established accordingto the Regulation of Minister of Agriculture No 1 from 07.01.2002 "Regulation on preventionagainst salmonellosis of farm animals". SMPF started in 2002 and is approved annually by theDirector General of Veterinary and Food Board.In addition to the monitoring programme samples are taken in the frames of officialsurveillance and by the industry in accordance with their self control programmes.

Measures in case of the positive findings

When salmonella is detected in samples taken at packaging centres, contaminated eggs can be usedfor the production of pasteurized products. When salmonella is detected in food already present on the market, contaminated food or raw materialwill be withdrawn from the market or handling.

Notification system in place

Salmonella detection in food is notifiable since 2000 according to the Infectious Animal DiseaseControl Act and the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases andDiseases subject to Registration". Laboratories investigating the safety and quality of the products on enterprises which handle food ofanimal origin are required to notify the Veterinary and Food Board about the isolation of pathogenswhich may cause infectious animal diseases subject to notification or registration or about suspicionof the occurrence of such pathogens in raw food material or products. In addition, such laboratoriesare obliged to notify the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation of zoonotic agents.Local Veterinary centres notify the local offices of the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolationof Salmonella in food.

Results of the investigation

In the year 2006 Salmonella has not been detected in any of 133 analyzed eggs taken at packingcentres and at retail.52 egg products taken from egg production establishments has been analyzed with no positivefindings.


The Estonian Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin 20022006 indicate thateggs taken at packaging centres are not contaminated with Salmonella.2,49 % of 281 egg product samples tested in the frames of the monitoring programme were positivefor Salmonella during these years.At the same time since the year 2004 there were no positive samples of egg products taken in theframes of the monitoring programme.

Relevance of the findings in animals to findings in foodstuffs and to human cases (as asource of infection)

In the year 2006 6 outbreaks of human salmonellosis were epidemiologically linked to theconsumption of eggs. 1 outbreak was linked to the consumption of omelet in the kindergarten, when


Estonia 2006 8

74 persons got ill.

B. Salmonella spp. in broiler meat and products thereof

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

At slaughterhouse and cutting plant

At slaughterhouses and cutting plants sampling is performed by the Veterinary andFood Board officials according to the Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food ofAnimal Origin (SMPF) and in the frames of official food surveillance sampling plans. In the frames of official food surveillance poultry meat, offal, carcase chilling waterand environment are sampled randomly at slaughterhouse. Targeted sampling ispreformed in cases of suspicion.Samples are taken also at border inspection posts in the frames of border veterinarychecks. The samples are taken randomly, but in case of noncompliance, more stringentchecks of consignments of the same origin are carried out. In addition to official monitoring and surveillance plans, every food business operatorhas the obligation to take samples in the frame of self control programmes.

At meat processing plant

In the frames of official food surveillance programme sampling is performedrandomly. Targeted sampling is performed in cases of suspicion, consumer complainsetc.

At retail

Random sampling is performed in accordance with the Health Protection Inspectorateannual plan as a part of official food control. Targeted sampling is preformed in casesof suspicion, consumer complains and etc.






At retail





Estonia 2006 9

Other: neck skin, fresh meat, scrap cuttings


Other: meat preparations, minced meat, meat products

At retail

Other: fresh and minced meat, meat products etc.



Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin comprises analyzes ofrandomly sampled meat or neck skin from carcasses at slaughterhouse and meat orscrap cuttings from cutting plants. At slaughterhouses sampling is performed once aweek. Samples are taken immediately after veterinary inspection at the final stage ofslaughter line before chilling of carcasses. Neck skin pieces of 10 g are taken usingsterile instruments. Samples from 10 carcasses may be accumulated into one cleansample container, marked in the way that the flock of origin and sampling date can beidentified and sent to the laboratory as soon as possible. Storing temperature +2 +4 C. The sampling at cutting plants is performed randomly and carried out weekly or twiceannually depending on the production capacity.


According to the official food surveillance sampling plans sampling is performed asfollows:minced meat, meat preparations plants raw material is sampled, if it does notoriginate from the slaughterhouse of the same establishment (sample analyzed 10 g);minced meat, meat preparations and meat preparations made from minced meat aresampled (sample consists of 5 subsamples, which are examined individually; samplesize 10 g),meat products establishments meat products are sampled regularly. Analyzed samplesize 25 g.

At retail

Sample analyzed 10 or 25 g according to the Commission Regulation 2073/ 2005.Number of subsamples is 5. Samples are stored at +2+4C and analyzed as soon aspossible.







Estonia 2006 10

At retail







At retail




Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) is established accordingto the Regulation of Minister of Agriculture No 1 from 07.01.2002 "Regulation on preventionagainst salmonellosis of farm animals". SMPF started in 2002 and is approved annually by theDirector General of Veterinary and Food Board.Prevention of salmonelloosis is based on analyzes made in the frames of salmonella monitoringprogramme, official control plans and establishment`s self control programme.

Measures in case of the positive findings or single cases

In case of positive findings in poultry meat at handling establishments, the extent of contaminationand its sources should be investigated. Thorough cleaning and disinfection should be carried out. Thesupervisory official may require the improvement of the effectiveness of cleaning procedures on theestablishment.Poultry meat should be destroyed or considered conditionally fit for human consumption and could bedestined for manufacturing of heat treated meat products under the supervision of official veterinarian.When salmonella is detected in food on the market, the food business operator has the obligation toremove the production with positive Salmonella finding from the market or handling.




Estonia 2006 11


20 (5,4 %) of 367 investigated samples of broiler meat and broiler meat products were positive forsalmonella in the year 2006 (in 2005 11,2 %). S.Enteritidis has been detected in 17 samples (in 2005 34 samples), S.Tshiongwe in 2 samples and S.group C1 in 1 sample.Positive samples mostly has been discovered among fresh broiler meat. Altogether 174 samples of broiler fresh meat have been taken in the year 2006. 12 samples werepositive. Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin data show that 0 of 52 samples ofbroiler neck skin taken at slauhterhouse and 5 (5,6 %) of 90 samples of fresh broiler meat wereSalmonella positive.In 2005 there were accordingly 8,9 % and 2,1 % of positive samples.


Data received from Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin 20022006 andanalyzes of samples taken in the frames of official control show that during years Salmonella has beendetected mostly in fresh broiler meat samples taken at cutting plants and at slaughterhouse and in neckskin samples taken at slaughter.Salmonella Enteritidis is the prevalent serovar in broiler meat.


In the year 2006 broiler meat and products thereof were supposed to be the source of infection inhuman in 4 family outbreaks. The relevance of the source of infection in human to broiler meat andproducts thereof has been determined on the basis of epidemiological investigation, but notbacteriologically.Salmonella Enteritidis is the main serovar detected in humans during many years.

C. Salmonella spp. in turkey meat and products thereof

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy


Random sampling is performed as a part of official food control. Targeted sampling ispreformed in cases of suspicion, consumer complains and etc.

At retail

Random sampling is performed as a part of official food control. Targeted sampling ispreformed in cases of suspicion, consumer complains and etc.





Estonia 2006 12

At retail




Other: fresh meat, meat preparation

At retail

Other: fresh meat, readytoeat and notreadytoeat products



Sample analyzed 10 or 25 g. Number of subsamples is 5. Samples are stored at+2+4C and analyzed as soon as possible.

At retail





At retail







At retail




As turkey meat in Estonia is mostly imported, sampling is performed at meat processing plants,


Estonia 2006 13

at retail or at border inspection posts. Sampling is random and is performed in the frames of theofficial food control.


The food or raw material for food should be removed from the market or handling.




There were 2 (6 %) positive samples in 2006. S.Typhimurium and S.hadar were detected. The positivesamples were not of Estonian origin.


It is very difficult to make any evaluation, as only imported turkey meat has been analyzed and theamount of the analyzed samples is very small.


In the year 2006 there were 2 positive samples of turkey meat. Turkey meat and products thereof werenot confirmed or suspected as a source of infection in human.

D. Salmonella spp. in pig meat and products thereof

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy


Fresh meat from pigs is sampled by the Veterinary and Food Board officials accordingto the Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) and inthe frames of official food surveillance sampling plans. In addition to officialmonitoring and surveillance, every food business operator has the obligation to takesamples in the frames of self control programmes.SMPF comprises analyzes of randomly sampled swabs from pig carcasses atslaughterhouse and meat or scrap cuttings from cutting plants. The number of surface


Estonia 2006 14

swab samples is related to the number of annually slaughtered animals (0,15 % ofslaughtered pigs in previous year) and the number of meat or scrap cuttings samples tothe capacity of the cutting plant (from cutting plants with production quantity over 5tons per week one sample once a week; from cutting plants with production quantityup to 5 tons per week one sample twice a year). In addition at the slaughterhouses, all carcasses with infection suspicions and pigsslaughtered under special conditions should be sampled.The sampling in the frames of official food surveillance is performed randomly.Targeted sampling is preformed in cases of suspicion, consumer complains etc.


Raw material, minced meat, meat preparations and meat products are sampledrandomly in the frame of official food surveillance by the officials of Veterinary andFood Board following the frequencies established in decrees of Director General ofVeterinary and Food Board. Targeted sampling is performed in cases of suspicion,consumer complains etc.

At retail

Random sampling is performed by the officials of Health Protection Inspectorate inaccordance with the Health Protection Inspectorate annual plan as a part of officialfood control. Targeted sampling is performed in cases of suspicion, consumercomplains and etc.






At retail




Other: surface of carcass, fresh meat


Other: fresh meat, minced meat, meat preparations, meat products

At retail

Other: minced meat, meat preparations, readytoeat and notreadytoeat products


Estonia 2006 15



Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin:at slaughterhouse swab samples should be taken after the inspection of the carcassesat the final stage of the slaughter line before chilling of the carcass. 2 surface samplesshould be taken from each carcass, each from 700 cm2, altogether 1400 cm2. The firstsample should be taken from the inner and outer surface of hind side, includinginguinal, altogether from area of 700 cm2. The second surface sample should be takenfrom the inner and outer surface of thoracic cavity and abdominal cavity in the area ofsternum, altogether from area of 700 cm2. Two sterile tampons in 10 ml of bufferedpepton water were used for sampling until the end of May 2006. Since June 2006 theswabs are taken by the 2 hydrasponges covering the area described above.The samples are sent to the laboratory as soon as possible. The samples should bemarked so, that enables to identify an animal, stockbreeder and date of sampling.at cutting plant samples should be taken during meat cutting from production line orany other appropriate site in the cutting plant. Samples with size of at least 25 g arestored at 04C and sent to the laboratory as soon as possible.According to the official food surveillance sampling plans random sampling of meat isperformed at slaughterhouses. Sample analyzed 25 g of meat. At cutting plants ortheir departments samples from raw material and from cuttings is sampled regularly inthe frames of official surveillance. If appropriate, crushed meat for heat treated meatproducts production and raw material for minced meat production for retailestablishments is sampled.


According to official food surveillance sampling plans:minced meat, meat preparations (incl. raw sausages) plants raw material is sampled,if not originating from the slaughterhouse of the same establishment (sample analyzed10 or 25 g); minced meat, meat preparations and meat preparations made of mincedmeat are sampled (each sample consists of 5 subsamples, which are examinedindividually; subsample weight analyzed 10 g each).meat products establishments meat products are sampled regularly. Sample analyzed 25 g.

At retail

Sample analyzed 10 or 25 g according to the Commission Regulation 2073/ 2005.Number of subsamples taken are 5. Samples are stored at +2+4C and analyzed as soonas possible.






Estonia 2006 16

A sample where Salmonella spp. has been isolated. In case of 5 subsamples the sampleis considered to be positive, if Salmonella spp. was isolated in one of subsamples.

At retail







At retail




Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) is established accordingto the Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture no 1 from 07.01.2002 "Regulation onprevention against salmonellosis of farm animals". SMPF started in 2002 and is approvedannually by the Director General of Veterinary and Food Board.Prevention of salmonellosis is based on analyzes made in the frames of salmonella monitoringprogramme, official control sampling and establishment`s self control programmes.


In case of positive Salmonella findings at slaughterhouses and cutting plants, the extent ofcontamination and its sources should be investigated. Thorough cleaning and disinfection should becarried out and the effectiveness of cleaning procedures should be improved. The infected carcassesshould be destroyed or considered as conditionally fit for human consumption and should be destinedfor heat treatment or .Retail: the food or raw material for food should be removed from the market or handling.


Salmonella detection in food is notifiable since 2000 according to the Infectious Animal DiseaseControl Act and the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases andDiseases subject to Registration". Laboratories investigating the safety and quality of the products of enterprises which handle food ofanimal origin are required to notify the Veterinary and Food Board about the isolation of pathogenswhich may cause infectious animal diseases subject to notification or registration or about suspicionof the occurrence of such pathogens in raw food material or products. In addition, such laboratoriesare obliged to notify the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation of zoonotic agents.Local Veterinary centres notify the local offices of the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation


Estonia 2006 17

of Salmonella in food.


Five (0,27 %) of the 1489 investigated samples of pig meat and pig meat products were positive forsalmonella in 2006 (2005 0,5 %). 2 S.Typhimurium and 1 S.group B has been isolated (in 2005 S 3 S.Typhimurium, 2 S.Dublin, 1S.Enteritidis and 1 S.Panama).1 carcase swab taken in the frames of the Salmonella monitoring programme was positive forSalmonella spp. This was the first time for discovering salmonella in sample taken in the frames ofSalmonella monitoring programme since the year 2002. This could be due to the start of usinghydrasponge instead of tampons, which enable to take samples from the large surface areas moreeffectively.


According to the data from Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin 2002 2006 altogether 3 (0,2 %) of 1422 pig meat samples taken at cutting plants and 2 (0,06 %) of 2950swab samples taken from carcasses at slaughter were positive for Salmonella.In comparison with the previous year the number of positive samples decreased in the year 2006:2004 12005 72006 4 positive samples.


In the year 2006 the pig meat and product thereof were not epidemiologically or bacteriologicallyconfirmed source of infection in humans. The predominant Salmonella serotype in humans wasS.Enteritidis and on the second position was S.Typhimurium.

E. Salmonella spp. in bovine meat and products thereof

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy


Fresh meat from cattle is sampled by Veterinary and Food Board officials according tothe Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) and in theframes of official food surveillance sampling plan. In addition to official monitoringand surveillance, every food business operator is obliged to take samples in the framesof the self control programmes.SMPF comprises analyzes of randomly sampled swabs from carcasses of cattle atslaughterhouse and meat or scrap cuttings from cutting plants. The number of surfaceswab samples is related to the number of annually slaughtered animals (0,6 % ofslaughtered cattle in previous year) and the number of meat or scrap cuttings samplesto the capacity of the cutting plant (from cutting plants with production quantity over 5tons per week one sample once a week; from cutting plants with production quantity


Estonia 2006 18

up to 5 tons per week one sample twice a year). In addition at the slaughterhouses, allcarcasses with infection suspicions and cattle slaughtered under special conditionsshould be sampled.Sampling in the frame of official food control is performed randomly. Targetedsampling is preformed in cases of suspicion, consumer complains etc.


In frame of official food surveillance raw material, minced meat, meat preparationsand meat products are sampled randomly by the officials of Veterinary and FoodBoard following the frequencies established in decrees of Director General ofVeterinary and Food Board. Targeted sampling is performed in cases of suspicion,consumer complains etc.

At retail

Random sampling is performed in accordance with the Health Protection Inspectorateannual plan as a part of official food control. Targeted sampling is preformed in casesof suspicion, consumer complains and etc.






At retail




Other: surface of carcase, fresh meat


Other: fresh meat, meat preparations, minced meat, meat products

At retail

Other: fresh meat, minced meat, readytoeat and notreadytoeat products



Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin:


Estonia 2006 19

at slaughterhouse swab samples should be taken after inspection of carcasses at thefinal stage of the slaughter line before chilling of the carcase. 2 surface samples shouldbe taken from each carcass, each from 700 cm2, altogether 1400 cm2. The first sampleshould be taken from the inner and outer surface of hind side, including inguinal,altogether from area of 700 cm2. The second surface sample should be taken from theinner and outer surface of thoracic cavity and abdominal cavity in the area of sternum,altogether from area of 700 cm2. Two sterile tampons in 10 ml of buffered peptonwater or special contact plates were used for sampling until the end of May 2006.Since July 2006 the hydrasponge is used.Samples are sent to the laboratory as soon as possible and should be marked so, that itenables to identify an animal, stockbreeder and date of sampling.In addition to the monitoring programme, meat is sampled at slaughterhousesaccording to the official food surveillance sampling plans. The weight of sampleanalysed is 25 g.at cutting plants samples should be taken during meat cutting from production line orany other appropriate site of the cutting plant. Samples with the weight of at least 25 gare stored at 04 C and sent to the laboratory as soon as possible.In addition, regular sampling of raw material and cuttings at cutting plants ordepartments is performed according to the official surveillance sampling plans. Ifappropriate, crushed meat for heat treated meat products production and raw materialfor minced meat production for retail establishments are sampled. The weight ofsample analysed is 10 or 25 g according to the Commission Regulation 2073/ 2005.


According to the official food surveillance sampling plan:at minced meat/ meat preparation (incl. raw sausages) plants raw material is sampled,if not originating from the slaughterhouse of the same establishment (sample weight 25g); minced meat, meat preparations and meat preparations made from minced meat aresampled (sample consists of 5 subsamples, which are examined individually; sampleweight 10 g),at meat products establishments meat products are sampled regularly. Weight of thesample analyzed is 25 g.

At retail




Salmonella positive sample/ batch a sample/ batch where Salmonella spp. has beenisolated.


Sample is considered to be positive, if Salmonella spp was isolated or if Salmonellaspp was isolated in any of subsamples (minced meat, meat preparations).


Estonia 2006 20

At retail







At retail


Preventive measures in place

Animal products should be examined in order to prevent the spread of illness to people and to find outthe health status of the herd from which animal products originate. Sampling is performed in theframes of Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin, official food surveillanceand establishment`s self control programmes.



Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin (SMPF) has been establishedaccording to the Regulation of Minister of Agriculture No 1 from 07.01.2002 "Regulation onprevention against salmonellosis of farm animals". SMPF started in 2002 and is approvedannually by the Director General of the Veterinary and Food Board.Prevention of salmonellosis is based on analyzes made in the frames of salmonella monitoringprogramme, official control plans and establishment`s self control programmes.


In case of positive Salmonella findings at slaughterhouses and cutting plants, the extent ofcontamination and its sources should be investigated. Thorough cleaning and disinfection should becarried out and the effectiveness of cleaning procedures should be improved. The infected carcassesshould be destroyed or considered as conditionally fit for human consumption and should be destinedfor heat treatment.Retail: the food or raw material for food should be removed from the market or handling.


Salmonella detection in food is notifiable since 2000 according to the Infectious Animal DiseaseControl Act and the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases andDiseases subject to Registration". Laboratories investigating the safety and quality of the products of enterprises which handle food ofanimal origin are required to notify the Veterinary and Food Board about the isolation of pathogens


Estonia 2006 21

which may cause infectious animal diseases subject to notification or registration or about suspicionof the occurrence of such pathogens in raw food material or products. In addition, such laboratoriesare obliged to notify the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation of zoonotic agents.Local Veterinary centres notify the local offices of the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolationof Salmonella in food.


783 samples were analyzed in the year 2006.226 samples of the total amount of samples were tested in the frames of postmortem official meatinspection when there was a suspicion that the slaughtered animal could be infected with Salmonella.3 (0,38 %) of the samples analyzed were considered to be positive for Salmonella. 1 S.Typhimurium,1 S.Derby and 1 S.Lexington were found.All samples taken in the frames of the monitoring programme were negative for Salmonella.


In the year 2006 Salmonella has been isolated in 0,38 % of the samples analyzed, in comparison withthe previous year when 0,2 % of the bovine meat has been contaminated with salmonella (mostlyfresh and minced meat).The Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal Origin 20022006 data document thatSalmonella has not been isolated from the samples of fresh bovine meat taken at cutting plants.Salmonella was detected in 1 swab sample taken from carcasses at slaughter in 2002, in 2 samples in2003 and in 1 swab sample in 2006.


In the year 2006 no one case of infection in human was epidemiologically linked to the bovine meatand products thereof.


Estonia 2006 22

Table Salmonella in poultry meat and products thereof

Source of information

Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Salmonella sp

p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

S. group C1

S. Tshiongwe

S. Hadar

Meat from broilers (Gallusgallus)

fresh at slaughterhouse animalsample neck skin Monitoring officialsampling

VFB batch 25 g 52 0

at slaughterhouse animalsample meat Monitoring official sampling

VFB batch 25 g 50 2 2

at cutting plant domesticproduction Monitoring official sampling

VFB batch 25 g 40 3 3

in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 32 0

at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 68 7 6 1

minced meat intended to be eaten cooked at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 3 1 1

meat preparation intended to be eaten cooked in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 10 g 29 1 1


meat products cooked, readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 56 2 2


Estonia 2006 23



offal at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 5 0

Meat from turkey fresh at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 3 0

minced meat intended to be eaten cooked at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 9 1 1

meat preparation intended to be eaten cooked at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 10 g 1 0


meat products cooked, readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 10 g 7 0

at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 10 g 7 0

Meat from other poultryspecies

fresh in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 3 0

meat preparation intended to be eatencooked


Estonia 2006 24

in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 10 g 6 0

meat products in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


Footnote

Monitoring Salmonella Monitoring Programme for Food of Animal OriginSurveillance official control, official sampling


Estonia 2006 25

Table Salmonella in milk and dairy products


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Milk, cows' raw intended for direct humanconsumption

at retail domesticproduction Surveillance

HPI single 25 g 19 0

pasteurised milk at processing plant domestic production Monitoring officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 4 0


VFB single 25 g 5 0


HPI single 25 g 3 0

Cheeses made from cows' milk soft and semisoft made from pasteurised milk at processing plant domestic production Monitoring officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 8 0


VFB single 25 g 5 0

hard made from pasteurisedmilk

at processing plant domestic production Monitoring officialsampling



Estonia 2006 26


VFB single 25 g 9 0

made from raw or lowheattreated milk

at processing plant domestic production Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 1 0

unspecified made from pasteurisedmilk


VFB single 25 g 1 0


Dairy products (excludingcheeses)

butter made from pasteurisedmilk


VFB single 25 g 9 0


VFB single 25 g 4 0

cream made from pasteurisedmilk


VFB single 25 g 4 0

milk powder and whey powder


VFB single 25 g 6 0


VFB single 25 g 8 0

icecream


Estonia 2006 27

made from pasteurisedmilk


VFB single 25 g 4 0




dairy products, not specified readytoeat made from pasteurisedmilk






dairy desserts in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 3 0

Infant formula dried at processing plant domestic production Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 2 0


Footnote



Estonia 2006 28

Table Salmonella in red meat and products thereof


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Salmonella spp.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella spp., unspecified

S. group B

S. enterica subsp. arizonae

S. Derby

S. Lexington

S. Infantis

Meat from pig

fresh

at cutting plant dom

estic

production M

onitoring

official sam

pling

VFB

single

25 g

347

0

in total Surveillance

official controls (other than

control and eradication

programmes) official

sampling

VFB

single

25 g

107

11

at slaughterhouse

Surveillance official

controls (other than control

and eradication


sampling suspect sampling

VFB

single

25 g

40

at retail Surveillance

HPI

single

25 g

191

1

minced meat


Estonia 2006 29

intended to be eaten cooked


official controls (other

than control and

eradication programmes)

official sam

pling

VFB

single

10 g

170

at retail Surveillance H

PIsingle

10 g

150

meat preparation



PIsingle

10 g

140





sampling

VFB

single

10 g

110

11

meat products

cooked, readytoeat

HPI

single

25 g

260





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

147

0

carcass

at slaughterhouse animal

sample carcass sw

abs

Monitoring official

sampling

VFB

single

swab

683

11

Meat from bovine animals

fresh

at cutting plant dom

estic

production M

onitoring

official sam

pling

VFB

single

25 g

780


Estonia 2006 30





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

115

21

1

at slaughterhouse



and eradication


sampling suspect sampling

VFB

single

25 g

226

0


HPI

single

25 g

10

minced meat



PIsingle

10 g

30





sampling

VFB

single

10 g

140

meat preparation





sampling

VFB

single

10 g

20

meat products

cooked, readytoeat


PIsingle

25 g

10





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

220


Estonia 2006 31

pâté


PIsingle

25 g

10

carcass


sample carcass sw

abs

Monitoring official

sampling

VFB

single

swab

320

11

Meat from sh

eep

fresh





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

321

1

meat preparation

intended to be eaten

cooked



than control and


official sam

pling

VFB

single

10 g

10

Meat, mixed meat

minced meat


cooked



than control and


official sam

pling

VFB

single

10 g

491

1

at retail dom

estic

production S

urveillance H

PIsingle

10 g

290

meat preparation


cooked


Estonia 2006 32



than control and


official sam

pling

VFB

single

10 g

572

11

meat products





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

120

0


HPI

single

25 g

180

pâté


PIsingle

25 g

50

Meat from rabbit

fresh


sample m

eat Surveillance




sampling

VFB

single

25 g

20

Meat from wild gam

e land

mam

mals

fresh





sampling

VFB

single

25 g

170

meat products


Estonia 2006 33

at processing plant



and eradication


sampling

VFB

single

25 g

210

Meat from deer (venison)

fresh

at processing plant



and eradication


sampling

VFB

single

25 g

10

Meat from farm

ed gam

e land

mam

mals

meat preparation

at processing plant



and eradication


sampling

VFB

single

10 g

30

Footnote

Monitoring S

almonella M

onitoring Programme for F

ood of Animal Origin

Surveillance official control, official sam

pling


Estonia 2006 34

Table Salmonella in other food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Eggs table eggs at retail (1) HPI single 25 g 1 0

at packing centre Monitoring officialsampling


at packing centre Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


Egg products dried at processing plant domestic production Monitoring officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 6 0

at processing plant domestic production Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 1 0

liquid at processing plant domestic production Monitoring officialsampling




Crustaceans


Estonia 2006 35

shrimps cooked at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 5 0


Sprouted seeds readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 3 0

at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 25 g 2 0

Fruits and vegetables precut readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 18 0

Juice fruit juice at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 8 0

vegetable juice at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 12 0


VFB single 25 g 1 0

Infant formula liquid at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 6 0

Foodstuffs intended for specialnutritional uses


VFB single 25 g 3 0

Fish raw chilled in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling


smoked coldsmoked


Estonia 2006 36

at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 1 0

hotsmoked at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 2 0

gravad / slightly salted at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 5 0

unspecified at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 33 0

Fishery products, unspecified raw chilled in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 25 g 4 0

frozen in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling


readytoeat in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


Roe at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 25 g 1 0

Fruits products in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 3 0

canned


Estonia 2006 37


Vegetables products in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


canned at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0

precut readytoeat at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 5 0

nonprecut at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


Readytoeat salads at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling


at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 173 2 2

Bakery products at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling


cakes at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 121 0


Confectionery products andpastes



Water bottled water


Estonia 2006 38


VFB single 25 g 2 0


Nuts and nut products in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 3 0

Spices and herbs in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

VFB single 25 g 3 0

Sauce and dressings at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling

VFB single 25 g 1 0

Other processed food productsand prepared dishes



at retail Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling

HPI single 25 g 48 0

Other food of nonanimalorigin



Cereals and meals at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 14 0

Sweets at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 22 0

(1) : surveillance

Footnote



Estonia 2006 39

2.1.4. Salmonella in animals

A. Salmonella spp. in Gallus gallus breeding flocks for egg production and flocksof laying hens

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Laying hens flocks

In order to prevent the spread of salmonellosis of farm animals, the animals should beexamined regularly in order to prove absence of salmonellosis in them or when theinfection has been detected in the herd to apply in a timely manner the preventionmeasures. The prevention of salmonellosis of farm animals is conducted through thestudies on the basis of salmonella monitoring plan and enterprise self controlprogrammes. Sampling is targeted (suspected flocks and herds), sampling is performedby official and authorised veterinarians of the Veterinary and Food Board. Samples aretaken at the farm, hatchery and slaughter houses. Sampling is a part of a permanentmonitoring scheme.


Laying hens: Rearing period

Other: at the age of 56 weeks or 2 weeks before production period

Laying hens: Production period

At the age of 2024 and 98104 weeks

Laying hens: Before slaughter at farm

2 weeks prior to slaughter


Laying hens: Dayold chicks

Other: Dead chicks, meconium


Faeces


Faeces


Other: Faeces, dust


Estonia 2006 40



United meconium sample should be taken from 250 chicks hatched out from the eggsof each flock brought to the hatchery or 50 chicks that have died inside egg shells orhave been hatched out and then died.


The number of faeces samples that should be taken from each flock is prescribedbelow:number of birds in the flock / number of samples124 / equal to the number of birds2529 / 203039 / 254049 / 305059 / 356089 / 4090199 / 50200499 / 55500 and more / 60In all birds raising enterprises producing hatching eggs, 10 % of the breeding flockbirds should be studied by the method of blooddrop agglutination, if the egglayingrate of egg breeds and meat breeds has reached respectively 50 % and 30 %.


See "Laying hens: Rearing period".


See "Laying hens: Rearing period".

Case definition


A flock or sample is considered to be positive if the presence of Salmonella spp. isdetected in at least one of the samples.


A flock is considered to be positive if the presence of Salmonella spp. is detected in atleast one of the samples.





Estonia 2006 41











Vaccination policy

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks when necessary)

Vaccination against salmonella is forbidden in Estonia.

Laying hens flocks


Other preventive measures than vaccination in place

Laying hens flocks

The handler should notify the authorised veterinarian servicing the enterprise or the veterinarysupervision official about detection of salmonella bacteria in the samples taken in frames of theenterprise self control programme. Veterinarian or supervision official should take samples toconfirm the infection and establish the prevention measures.The final products on the enterprises handling feedingstuffs shall be studied bacteriologicallyunder the framework of monitoring and self control plans.Official samples from imported feedingstuffs should be taken in the course of randominspection of their storing.Altogether 100 official feedingstuff samples should be taken and studied each year.



Laying hens flocks

Sampling is performed in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring andSurveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases, which is approved annually by the


Estonia 2006 42

Director General of the Veterinary and Food Board and is established according to theRegulation of the Minister of Agriculture No 1 from 07.01.2002 "Prevention againstSalmonellosis of farm animals".In order to monitor salmonellosis in birds, the owner or person responsible for thehatchery or for the birds flock should examine at his expense the flocks and hatcheriesonce a year in the proportions specified in the table above.In case of bacteriological studies of breeding flock the samples should be replaced byofficial samples every 8th week.


Laying hens flocks

The supervision official should find out the infection sources and their spreading ways, removeor block them. It is prohibited to take birds to a flock doubted to be infected or actually infectedor totake them out, except for slaughter. All birds flocks (young birds, breeding flock,productive flock), where Salmonella spp. has been diagnosed should be executed or sentimmediately for slaughter. After the flock infected by salmonellosis has been sent to theslaughterhouse, the carriage boxes, transport boxes and transport means shall be cleaned,washed and disinfected. The litter of flocks infected by salmonellosis shall be composted awayfrom the livestock buildings. Enclosures and inventory of poultry farm shall be cleaned, washedand disinfected after the litter of birds has been taken out and tested then bacetriologically forsalmonellas. The dead and slaughtered birds shall be made harmless or utilised. Poultrybuildings should be checked on the efficiency of deratisation, disinfection and on protectionagainst wild birds. Empty period is required for 21 day. Disposal of manure is restricted.Feedingstuffs should be destructed or heattreated. Taking into account the particulars of eachcase, the Veterinary and Food Board has the right to allow the use of alternative methods liketreatment with antibiotics instead slaughter of breeding flock.


Infection with Sallmonella spp. (S. enteritidis, S. typhimurium, S. dublin, S. newport, S. cholerasuis)is notifiable since 2000 according to the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of NotifiableDiseases and Diseases subject to Registration".


During the year 2006 25 flocks were analyzed and 1 of them was found to be positive for SalmonellaEnteritidis. Altogether 2486 samples taken from laying hens reared in 25 flocks have been tested inthe frames of the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases. 10samples taken from 1 flock were positive for Salmonella Enteritidis.


The overall prevalence of salmonella in laying hens is 0,4 %.

B. Salmonella spp. in Gallus gallus breeding flocks for meat production andbroiler flocks


Estonia 2006 43

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks whennecessary)

In order to prevent the spread of salmonellosis in farm animals, the animals should beexamined regularly in order to prove absence of salmonellosis in them or when theinfection has been detected in the herd to apply in a timely manner the preventionmeasures. The prevention of salmonellosis of farm animals is conducted through thestudies on the basis of salmonella monitoring plan and enterprise self controlprogrammes. Sampling is targeted (suspected flocks and herds), sampling is performedby official and authorised veterinarians of the Veterinary and Food Board. Samples aretaken at the farm, hatchery and slaughter houses. Sampling is a part of a permanentmonitoring scheme.

Broiler flocks

The same as mentioned above.


Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks whennecessary): Dayold chicks

Every flock is sampled

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks whennecessary): Rearing period

Other: 3 weeks prior to moving and 3 weeks before laying

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks whennecessary): Production period

Every 8 weeks

Broiler flocks: Before slaughter at farm

Every flock is sampled



Dead chicks



Estonia 2006 44

Faeces


Faeces


Faeces



Young birds of the breeding flock dayold chicks that have got killed and internallinings of chick boxes (10 samples per flock/ lot).


3 weeks before relocation and 3 weeks before laying copro samples or cloaca tamponsamples should be taken from each flock.The number of faeces samples that should be taken from each flock is prescribedbelow:number of birds in the flock / number of samples124 / equal to the number of birds2529 / 203039 / 254049 / 305059 / 356089 / 4090199 / 50200499 / 55500 and more / 60

Breeding flocks: Production period

Each eighth week copro samples or cloaca tampon samples are taken from each flockin the number prescribed below:number of birds in the flock / number of samples124 / equal to the number of birds2529 / 203039 / 254049 / 305059 / 356089 / 4090199 / 50200499 / 55


Estonia 2006 45

500 and more / 60In all bird raising enterprises produsing hatching eggs, 10 % of the birds of breedingflock should be studied by the method of blooddrop agglutination, if the egglayingrate of egg breeds and meat breeds has reached respectively 50 % and 30 %.


Broilers 12 weeks before their slaughter copro samples or cloaca tampon samplesare taken from each flock in the number prescribed below:number of birds in the flock / number of samples124 / equal to the number of birds2529 / 203039 / 254049 / 305059 / 356089 / 4090199 / 50200499 / 55500 and more / 60.Samples are taken by the industry in the frames of the selfcontrol programme.

Case definition


A positive case is an animal/ flock confirmed positive for Salmonella.





Broiler flocks: Dayold chicks


Broiler flocks: Rearing period




Broiler flocks: At slaughter (flock based approach)


Estonia 2006 46















Vaccination policy

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks when necessary)


Broiler flocks



Broiler flocks

The handler should notify the authorised veterinarian servicing the enterprise or the veterinarysupervision official about detection of salmonella bacteria in the samples taken in frames of theenterprise self control programme. Veterinarian or supervision official should take samples toconfirm the infection and establish the prevention measures.The final products on the enterprises handling feedingstuffs shall be studied bacteriologicallyunder the framework of monitoring and self control programmes.Official samples from imported feedingstuffs should be taken in the frames of randominspection of their storing.


Estonia 2006 47

Altogether 100 official feedingstuff samples should be taken and studied each year.



Broiler flocks

State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectoius Diseases isapproved annually by the Director General of the Veterinary and Food Board and isestablished according to the Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture No 1 from07.01.2002 "Prevention against Salmonellosis of farm animals".In all bird raising enterprises producing hatching eggs, 10% of the birds of breedingflock should be studied by the method of blooddrop agglutination, if the egglayingrate of egg breeds and meat breeds has reached respectively 50% and 30%.To monitor salmonellosis in birds, the owner or person responsible for the hatchery orbirds flock should examine once a year at his expense the flocks and hatcheries in theproportions specified in the part "Methods of sampling". In the case of bacteriologicalstudies of the breeding flocks the samples shall be replaced by official samples each8th week.


Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks when necessary):Dayold chicks

The supervision official should find out the infection sources and their spreading ways, removeor block them.It is prohibited to take birds to a flock doubted to be infected or actually infected or to takethem out, except for slaughter.All birds flocks (young birds, breeding flock, productive flock), where Salmonella spp. hasbeen diagnosed should be executed or sent immediately for slaughter.After the flock infected by salmonellosis has been sent to the slaughterhouse, the carriageboxes, transport boxes and transport means shall be cleaned, washed and disinfected. The litter of flocks infected by salmonellosis should be composted away from the livestockbuildings.Enclosures and inventory of poultry farm shall be cleaned, washed and disinfected after thelitter of birds has been taken out and tested then bacetriologically for salmonellas.The dead and slaughtered birds shall be made harmless or utilised. Poultry buildings should bechecked on the efficiency of deratisation, disinfection and on protection against wild birds.Empty period is required for 21 day.Disposal of manure is restricted. Feedingstuffs should be destructed or heattreated.Taking into account the particulars of each case, the Veterinary and Food Board has the right toallow the use of alternative methods like treatment with antibiotics instead slaughter ofbreeding flock.

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks when necessary):Rearing period



Estonia 2006 48

Breeding flocks (separate elite, grand parent and parent flocks when necessary):Production period








Broiler flocks: At slaughter (flock based approach)





In the year 2006 0,6 % of breeding birds were detected to be positive for Salmonella. Salmonellaenteritidis was detected in all cases.During the period 01.10.0530.09.2006 in the frames of the Baseline study on the prevalence ofSalmonella spp. in flocks of broilers Gallus gallus 769 sock swabs samples were collected from 154flocks. Positive results were found in 8 flocks out of 154 flocks reared in 4 holdings. SalmonellaEnteritidis was isolated in two holdings. Salmonella Enteritidis was detected in 14 sock swabs. Allother samples collected and investigated turn to be negative. Salmonella serovars isolated: SalmonellaEnteritidis (O: 1,9,12;gm;). Prevalence of Salmonella spp. in holdings was 50% (2:4X100).


The occurence of salmonella in breeding flocks for meat production is low. The predominant Salmonella serovar is Salmonella enteritidis.


S.enteritidis is the most widespread serotype among humans. Poultry meat is supposed to be thesource of human infection.

C. Salmonella spp. in pigs

Monitoring system


Estonia 2006 49

Sampling strategy

Multiplying herds

In order to monitor salmonellosis in breeding, multiplying or fattening pig herds, theherds as well as animals sent to the artificial fertilization stations should be examined.As official samples the herds should be examined in the quantities provided by themonitoring plan of the Veterinary and Food Board.The herds should be examined bacteriologically on the basis of copro samples, takinginto account the following proportions:size of the herd / number of animals to be examinedless than 25 / equal to the number of animals25100 / 25over 100 / 30.Copro samples should be taken by age groups or keeping groups from meat pigs lessthan one year old, a copro sample of one animal per 510 animals.Copro samples from animals under examination should be united into a pooled sample.When transferring pigs to artificial fertilization station or to the breeding herd kept forthe purposes of artificial fertilization, animals should be examined bacteriologicallywithin 30 days before the transfer on the basis of individual copro samples or at thefertilization station during the quarantine on the basis of individual copro samples.


Breeding herds

Faeces

Multiplying herds

Faeces

Fattening herds at farm

Faeces


Multiplying herds

In order to diagnose salmonellosis in pigs on the basis of a clinical picture orpathologicanatomical findings the copro samples should be taken from the rectum ofanimals with the doubt of salmonellosis.From the rectum of animals under examination a faeces sample (at least 10 grams)should be taken by an individual plastic glove or bag, the inside of which shall beturned out then and marked for identification of the sample.The individual copro samples in the laboratory should be halved. At least 5 gramsshould be necessary for the studies and at least 5 g should be preserved at thetemperature 4°C until the end of bacteriological studies. The halves under study maybe united by five into a pooled sample. If the pooled sample has positive reaction, theanimals accumulated under the pooled sample shall be examined again on the basis of


Estonia 2006 50

individual samples.

Case definition

Multiplying herds

An animal or flock where Salmonella spp. has been isolated.


Breeding herds


Multiplying herds


Fattening herds at farm


Fattening herds at slaughterhouse (herd based approach)


Vaccination policy

Breeding herds


Multiplying herds


Fattening herds




Multiplying herds

Samples are taken in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring andSurveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases, which is approved annually by theDirector General of the Veterinary and Food Board.To monitor salmonellosis of pig, the herds as well as animals sent to artificialfertilization stations shall be examined. The herds shall be examined bacteriologicallyon the basis of copro samples, taking into account the following proportions:size of the herd / number of animals to be examinedless than 25 / equal to the number of animals


Estonia 2006 51

25100 / 25over 100 / 30The copro samples of the animals under examination shall be united into a pooledsample.In transferring the pigs to artificial fertilization station or to the breeding herd kept forthe purposes of artificial fertilization, they shall be examined bacteriologically within30 days before the transfer on the basis of individual copro samples or in thefertilization station during the quarantine on the basis of individual copro samples.

Fattening herds

Samples are taken in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring andSurveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases, which is approved annually by theDirector General of the Veterinary and Food Board.From fattening pigs less than one year old copro samples shall be taken by age groupsor keeping groups, a copro sample of one animal per 510 animals, taking into accountthe following proportions:size of the herd / number of animals to be examinedless than 25 / equal to the number of animals25100 / 25over 100 / 30.


The infection sources and spreading ways should be found out in a herd infected by salmonellosis andthen they should be removed or blocked.In order to discover the origin of infection, samples on presence of salmonellas should be taken alsofrom contact farm animals, while one animal from 510 animals should be examined, and fromfeedstuffs. If any animal has the characteristics of clinical salmonellosis, individual samples should betaken from such animals.If salmonellosis is detected at farm in animals other than pigs or it is detected in people working atfarm, the herds of pigs at farms should be examined.In case of diagnosing salmonellosis in a pig, animals in the herd of origin, which have not beenexamined for salmonellosis, should be examined or if salmonellosis has been detected in the course ofannual monitoring, samples should be taken from the herd of origin.The stockbreeder should immediately separate the animals that are clinically ill and salmonellapositive from other animals as safely as possible.The separated animals should be subjected to medical treatment if necessary, and the occurrence ofsalmonellas should be studied on the basis of individual copro samples every week until receiving twoconsecutive negative results, or should be sent for slaughter.Pigs should be kept inside premises so that they cannot be in contact with other animals.Only the personnel looking after animals are allowed to stay at farm. When looking after the animals,the personnel should wear appropriate protective clothes and in leaving the livestock premises theirfootwear should be cleaned thoroughly and disinfected.A stockbreeder has to keep records on salmonella studies concerning all farm animals.After sending the animals doubted to be infected or actually infected for slaughter, the livestockpremises, bedsteads, feeding stands and keeping tools should be cleaned and disinfected according tothe prescriptions of veterinarian.


Estonia 2006 52

Manure and used litter of pigs should be handled according to the prescriptions of authorizedveterinarian so that the spread of salmonella should be prevented.Deratization, disinfection and protection against wild birds should be organized.The access of dogs and cats to livestock premises should be precluded.




During 2006 600 samples were tested in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring andSurveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases. Salmonella agona was isolated in one sample (0,17 %).


In the year 2006 Salmonela enteritidis was isolated in the Veterinary and Food Laboratory in 5samples, Salmonella typhimurium in 2, Salmonella Agona in 4, Salmonella Bareily in 1 andSalmonella Infantis in 1 sample.In 2005 Salmonella Stanleyville was isolated in 3 and Salmonella Typhimurium in 8 samples takenfrom pigs.In the year 2004 there were no S.Stanleyville isolated and S.typhimurium composes 0,4 % (2 of the532 samples) of the samples tested.


There were no human cases of salmonellosis caused by S.Bareily, S.Agona and S.Reading in 2006.

D. Salmonella spp. in bovine animals

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

To monitor salmonellosis in cattle, the herds as well as animals sent to artificial fertilizationstations should be examined. As official samples the herds should be examined in the quantitiesprovided by the monitoring plan of the Veterinary and Food Board.The herds should be examined bacteriologically on the basis of copro samples, taking intoaccount the following proportions:size of the herd / number of animals to be examinedless than 25 / equal to the number of animals25100 / 25over 100 / 30.From cattle less than one year old copro samples should be taken by age groups or keepinggroups, a copro sample of one animal per 510 animals.The copro samples from animals under examination should be united into a pooled sample.In transferring the cattle to artificial fertilization station or to the breeding herd kept for the


Estonia 2006 53

purposes of artificial fertilization, animals should be examined bacteriologically within 30 daysbefore the transfer on the basis of individual copro samples or in the fertilization station duringthe quarantine on the basis of individual copro samples.


Animals at farm

Faeces


Animals at farm

To diagnose salmonellosis in cattle on the basis of a clinical picture orpathologicanatomical findings the copro samples should be taken from the rectum ofanimals with the doubt of salmonellosis.From the rectum of animals under examination a faeces sample at least 10 gramsshould be taken by an individual plastic glove or bag, the inside of which should beturned out then and marked for identification of the sample.The individual copro samples should be halved in the laboratory. At least 5 gramsshould be necessary for the studies and at least 5 g should be preserved at thetemperature 4°C until the end of bacteriological studies. The halves under study maybe united by five into a pooled sample. If the pooled sample has positive reaction, theanimals accumulated under the pooled sample should be examined again on the basisof individual samples.To diagnose salmonellosis in cattle, besides copro samples also organ samples shouldbe taken from dead animals.Animals tissue samples of at least 25 grams should be taken from liver, spleen andfrom lymph nodes in small intestine and caecum area (35 pieces), each sample shouldbe placed separately in a new plastic bag and marked for identification of the sample.The organ samples from one animal may be accumulated in an additional package.The organ samples from one animal may be integrated into one sample in thelaboratory. The sample should be homogenised and preenriched in buffered peptonewater.The following samples should be taken from the herd infected by salmonellosisdetected during the studies or monitoring: individual copro samples from all cattles over one year old. The samples may beaccumulated by five into an additional package; individual copro samples from the cattle less than one year old, that have clinicalcharacteristics referring to salmonellosis; copro samples from the cattle without clinical characteristics, breakdown by agegroups or keeping groups, a sample from one animal per 510 animals; samples of feedingstuffs or their components.

Case definition

Animals at farm

An animal or flock where Salmonella spp. has been isolated.


Estonia 2006 54


Animals at farm


Animals at slaughter (herd based approach)


Vaccination policy






Sampling is performed in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance ofAnimal Infectious Diseases, which is approved annually by the Director General of theVeterinary and Food Board.


In a herd infected with Salmonella the infection sources and spreading ways should be detected andthen removed or blocked.To find out the origin of infection, samples on presence of Salmonella also from contact farm animals,while one animal from 510 animals should be examined, and from feedstuffs should be taken. If anyanimal has the characteristics of clinical salmonellosis, individual samples should be taken from suchanimals.If salmonellosis is diagnosed at farm in animals other than cattle or it is detected in people working atfarm, the cattle herds at farms should be examined.In case of diagnosing salmonellosis in cattle, the animals in the herd of origin which have not beenexamined for salmonellosis, should be examined or if salmonellosis has been detected in the course ofannual monitoring, samples should be taken from the herd of origin.The stockbreeder should immediately separate the animals that are clinically ill and salmonellapositive from other animals as safely as possible.The separated animals should be subjected to medical treatment if necessary, and the occurrence ofsalmonellas should be tested on the basis of individual copro samples every week until receiving twoconsecutive negative results, or animals should be sent for slaughter.Animals should be kept inside premises so that they cannot be in contact with the other animals.Only the personnel looking after animals is allowed to stay at farm. When looking after the animals,the personnel should wear appropriate protective clothes and in leaving the livestock premises theirfootwear should be cleaned thoroughly and disinfected.A stockbreeder has to keep records on salmonella studies concerning all farm animals.After sending the animals doubted to be infected or actually infected for slaughter, the livestockpremises, bedsteads, feeding stands and keeping tools should be cleaned and disinfected according to


Estonia 2006 55

the prescriptions of veterinarian.Manure and used litter of cattle should be handled according to the prescriptions of authorizedveterinarian so that the spread of salmonella should be prevented.Deratization, disinfection and protection against wild birds should be organized.Dogs and cats access to livestock premises should be precluded.




During 2006 1213 samples were tested in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring andSurveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases. Salmonella typhimurium was isolated in one sample(0,08 %).


The existing control programmes and investigations document that S.Typhimurium is the prevalentserovar detected in Estonian food production animals.


S.Typhimurium is on the second place among Salmonella serovars isolated from humans duringyears.


Estonia 2006 56

Table Salmonella in breeding flocks of Gallus gallus


Sampling unit

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Gallus gallus (fowl) parent breeding flocks formeat production line

during rearing period VFB flock 6 0

during production period VFB flock 10 6 6


Estonia 2006 57

Table Salmonella in other poultry


Sampling unit

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Gallus gallus (fowl) laying hens VFB flock 25 1 1

broilers sampling in theframework of the broilerbaseline study

at farm VFB flock 154 8 8

at farm Surveillance HACCP or own checks byindustry sampling byindustry

VFB flock 154 8 8


Estonia 2006 58

Table Salmonella in other birds


Sampling unit

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Quails VFL animal 13 0

Pheasants VFL animal 2 0

Partridges VFL animal 9 0

Ostriches VFL animal 5 0

Turkeys mixed flocks/ holdings VFL animal 2 0

Birds pet animals VFL animal 2 0

wild VFL animal 3 0

Geese VFL animal 2 0


Estonia 2006 59

Table Salmonella in other animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Salmonella spp.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella spp., unspecified

S. Dublin

S. Reading

S. Bareilly

S. Infantis

S. Agona

S. Mkamba


Cattle (bovine animals)

VFL

animal

927

6833

1416

5

Monitoring

VFB

animal

1213

11

Sheep

VFL

animal

333

3

Pigs

VFL

animal

522

125

21

13

Monitoring

VFB

animal

600

11

Dogs

pet animals

VFL

animal

100

Wild boars

VFL

animal

20

Rabbits

VFL

animal

160

Zoo animals, all

VFL

animal

190

Foxes

VFL

animal

20

Footnote

Monitoring S

tate Program

me on M

onitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases


Estonia 2006 60

2.1.5. Salmonella in feedingstuffs

Table Salmonella in feed material of animal origin


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


p.

S. Enteritidis

S. Typhimurium

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Feed material of land animalorigin

dairy products PPI batch 25 g 1 0

Feed material of marineanimal origin

fish meal PPI batch 25 g 4 0


Estonia 2006 61

Table Salmonella in other feed matter


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


p.

S. Typhimurium

S. Enteritidis

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Feed material of cereal grainorigin

barley derived PPI batch 25 g 1 0

Feed material of oil seed orfruit origin

rape seed derived PPI batch 25 g 5 0

soya (bean) derived PPI batch 25 g 6 0


Estonia 2006 62

Table Salmonella in compound feedingstuffs


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


p.

S. Typhimurium

S. Enteritidis

Salmonella sp

p., unspecified

Compound feedingstuffs forcattle

final product PPI batch 25 g 4 0

Compound feedingstuffs forpigs

final product PPI batch 25 g 7 0

Compound feedingstuffs, notspecified

final product VFB batch 25 g 18 0


Estonia 2006 63

2.1.6. Salmonella serovars and phagetype distribution

The methods of collecting, isolating and testing of the Salmonella isolates are described in the chapters aboverespectively for each animal species, foodstuffs and humans. The serotype and phagetype distributions can beused to investigate the sources of the Salmonella infections in humans. Findings of same serovars andphagetypes in human cases and in foodstuffs or animals may indicate that the food category or animal species inquestion serves as a source of human infections. However as information is not available from all potentialsources of infections, conclusions have to be drawn with caution.


Estonia 2006 64

Table Salmonella serovars in animals

Serovars

Gallus gallus (fowl) laying hens


Pigs

Gallus gallus (fowl)

Other poultry

Gallus gallus (fowl) broilers unspecified

Sheep

Gallus gallus (fowl) broilers sampling in the framework of the broiler baseline study

Sources of isolates (*)

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

Num

ber of isolates in the laboratory

N=

100

627

103

200

00

160

00

314

0

Num

ber of isolates serotyped

N=

100

627

103

200

00

160

00

314

0

Num

ber of isolates per type

S. Agona

4

S. Bareilly

1

S. Dublin

104


Estonia 2006 65

S. Enteritidis

105

20160

14

S. Infantis

1

S. M

bandaka

5

S. Reading

151

S. Typhimurium

322

11


3

Footnote

(*) M

: Monitoring, C : Clinical


Estonia 2006 66

Table Salmonella serovars in food

Serovars

Readytoeat salads


Meat from pig

Meat from broilers (Gallus gallus)

Other poultry

Other products of animal origin

Meat from sheep

Meat, mixed meat

Sources of isolates (*)

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

MC

Num

ber of isolates in the laboratory

N=

60

30

50

330

20

00

10

70

Num

ber of isolates serotyped

N=

60

30

40

330

20

00

10

70

Num

ber of isolates per type

S. Derby

11

S. Enteritidis

623

1

S. Hadar

1

S. Infantis

5

S. Lexington

1

S. Tshiongwe

9

S. Typhimurium

13

1

S. group B

1


1

S. group C1

1

Footnote


Estonia 2006 67

(*) M

: Monitoring, C : Clinical


Estonia 2006 68

2.1.7. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella isolates

Antimicrobial resistance is the ability of certain microorganisms to survive or grow in the presence of a givenconcentration of antimicrobial agent that usually would kill or inhibit the microorganism species in question.Antimicrobial resistant Salmonella strains may be transferred from animals or foodstuffs to humans.

A. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in cattle

Sampling strategy used in monitoring


The isolates originate from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g Salmonella controlprogramme, clinical samples.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine animals.


Methods of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine animals.

Procedures for the selection of isolates for antimicrobial testing

One isolate from each herd or case is included to the present report.

Methods used for collecting data

All isolates and data concerning isolates were collected from local laboratories and tested in theCentral Laboratory of the VFL.

Laboratory methodology used for identification of the microbial isolates

Details of laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine animals.Serotyping is performed in the VFL Central Lab.

Laboratory used for detection for resistance

Antimicrobials included in monitoring

Resistance testing performed according to CLSI M31A2 using disc diffusion method inMuellerHinton agar plates. Quality control according to the CLSI standards; Escherichia coliATCC 25922 was used as Quality control strain.Antimicrobials included in monitoring are ampicillin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin,chloramphenicol, florfenicol, cefotaxime, cephalothin, sulfonamide, trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole, nalidixic acid, streptomycin, kanamycin, tetracycline.

Breakpoints used in testing

Details of breakpoints are described in the table Breakpoints for antimicrobial susceptibility


Estonia 2006 69

testing of Salmonella in Animals


In 2006 14 Salmonella isolates from cattle were tested (7 S.Typhimurium, 4 S.Reading, 2 S.Dublin, 1S.Mbandaka).10 (71%) were fully sensitive,2 (15%) were resistant to 1 antimicrobial,1 (7 %) was resistant to 4 antimicrobials,1 (7 %) were resistant to 5 antimicrobials.Detailed information about 2006 can be found in the resistance tables.


The number of fully sensitive isolates increased in comparison with the previous year (2005).


In 2006 we did not isolated S.Enteritidis in cattle. S.Enteritidis isolated from bovine animals in 2005was resistant to nalidixic acid and nitrofurantoin. S.Enteritidis isolated from humans was resistant toampicillin, streptomycin, sulfonamide, tetracyclin, trimetoprim, gentamicin and nalidixic acid (in2005 to sulfonamides and nalidixic acid).S.Typhimurium isolated from cattle was resistant to tetracyclines, sulfonamide, ampicillin,trimethoprim/ sulfonamide and streptomycin. S.Typhimurium isolated from humans was resistant toampicillin, streptomycin, sulfonamide, tetracyclin, trimetoprim and cefotaxim (in 2005 totetracycline, ampicillin and chloramphenicol).

B. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in pigs



The isolates originate from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g control programmes,clinical samples.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pigs.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pigs.


One isolate from each positive herd was included in present report.


All isolates and data concerning isolates are collected in the Central Laboratory of the


Estonia 2006 70

Veterinary and Food Laboratory.Susceptibility testing is performed in the Central Lab.


Details of laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pigs. Serotyping isperformed in the VFL Central Lab.



Resistance testing performed according to CLSI M31A2 using disc diffusion method inMuellerHinton agar plates. Quality control according to the CLSI standards; Escherichia coliATCC 25922 was used as Quality control strain.Antimicrobials included in monitoring are ampicillin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin,chloramphenicol, florfenicol, cefotaxime, cephalothin, sulfonamide, trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole, nalidixic acid, streptomycin, kanamycin, tetracyclin.


Details of breakpoints are described in the table Breakpoints for antibiotic resistance testing ofSalmonella.


5 Salmonella strains originated from pigs were tested in VFL in 2006.S.Typhimurium, S.Bareilly, S,Agona, S.Infantis isolates were fully sensitive.


The number of Salmonella strains isolated from pigs and tested on antimicrobial resistance was verysmall. Thus it is not possible to make any decision.

C. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in poultry



The isolates originate from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g control programmes,clinical samples.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in poultry.


Methods of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in poultry.


Estonia 2006 71


One isolate from each flock or batch was included.


All isolates and data concerning isolates are collected in the Central Laboratory of theVeterinary and Food Laboratory.Susceptibility testing is performed in the Central Lab.


Details of the laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in poultry.







In 2006 11 S.Enteritidis isolates were tested.Resistance was discovered to nalidixic acid (55 %), tetracycline (9 %), ampicillin (45%), sulfonamide(27%), trimethoprim/ sulfonamide (27%), chloramphenicol (18%), cephalothin (9%), gentamicin(9%). 27% of strains were resistant to 4 antimicrobials.


An increase in the incidence of strains that are resistant to nalidixic acid is noted among isolates frompoultry. There was also an increasing incidence of resistance detected among poultry.


In the year 2006 7,7 % of S.Enteritidis strains isolated from humans was resistant to sulfonamides (in2005 39 %), 6,5 % to ampicillin (in 2005 13 %), 5 % to trimetoprim (in 2005 9,9 %) and 4,9 % tonalidixic acid (in 2005 35 %).

D. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in foodstuff derived from cattle


Estonia 2006 72



The isolates originate from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g Salmonella controlprogramme.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine meat and productsthereof


Methods of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine meat and productsthereof


One isolate from each positive batch is included to the present report.


Isolates and data concerning isolates were collected from local laboratories and tested in theVFL Central Lab.


Details of laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in bovine meat andproducts thereof. Serotyping is performed in the VFL Central Lab.





Details of breakpoints are described in the table Breakpoints for antibiotic resistance testing ofSalmonella


2 Salmonella isolates originated from beef were tested: 1 S.Typhimurium, 1 S.Lexington. Both of them were fully sensitive.


Estonia 2006 73


The number of Salmonella isolates is very small, thus it is very hard to make any decision.


S.Typhimurium isolated from humans was resistant to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, streptomycin,sulfonamide, tetracycline, trimetoprim, cefotaxim.

E. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in foodstuff derived from pigs



The isolates originate from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g Salmonella controlprogramme.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pig meat and products thereof


Methods of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pig meat and products thereof




Isolates and data concerning isolates were collected from local laboratories and tested in theVFL Central Lab.


Details of laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in pig meat and productsthereof. Serotyping is performed in the VFL Central Lab.





Estonia 2006 74


Details of breakpoints are described in the table Breakpoints for antibiotic resistance testing ofSalmonella


2 strains isolated from pig meat were tested in VFL in 2006.One isolate (S.Typhimurium) was resistant to 4 antimicrobials: streptomycin, tetracyclin, ampicillin,trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole.1 isolate Salmonella spp. (non typable) was fully sensitive.


The overall resistance situation of salmonella isolates in pig meat and products thereof is quitefavourable.

F. Antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella in foodstuff derived from poultry



The isolates originated from samples that routinely come to the lab, e.g Salmonella controlprogramme.


Details of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in broiler meat and productsthereof


Methods of sampling are described in the text Salmonella spp. in broiler meat and productsthereof




All isolates and data concerning isolates are collected in the Central Laboratory of theVeterinary and Food Laboratory.Susceptibility testing is performed in the Central Lab.


Details of laboratory methodology are described in the text Salmonella spp. in poultry. Serotyping is performed in the VFL Central Lab.



Estonia 2006 75






13 strains originated from poultry meat or products thereof were tested:12 strains of S.Enteritidis, 1 S.Newport. Resistance was found to nalidixic acid 11 strains (85%), tetracycline 1 strain (7%), streptomycin 1strain (7%), ampicillin 1 strain (7%).


High resistance to nalidixic acid is noted among isolates from poultry meat.


In the year 2006 7,7 % of S.Enteritidis strains isolated from humans was resistant to sulfonamides (in2005 39 %), 6,5 % to ampicillin (in 2005 13 %), 5 % to trimetoprim (in 2005 9,9 %) and 4,9 % tonalidixic acid (in 2005 35 %).42 % of S.Typhimurium strains isolated from humans was resistant to ampicillin (in 2005 53 %), 33% to tetracycline (in 2005 63 %), 33 % to streptomycin (in 2005 40 %), 20 % to sulfonamide (in2005 28,6 %), 15 % to trimetoprim (in 2005 25 %) and 6,9 % to chloramphenicol (in 2005 18,8%).


Estonia 2006 76

Table Antimicrobial su

sceptib

ility testing of S. E

nteritidis in Gallus gallus (fowl) quantitative data

[Diffusion method]

Num

ber of resistant isolates (n) and num

ber of isolates with

the concentration µl/ m

l) or zone (m

m) of inhibition equal to

S. Enteritidis

Gallus g

allus (fowl)

Isolates out of a monitoring

programme

no

Num

ber of isolates available in

the laboratory

11

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

111

11

52

2

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

112

11

11

14

2

Florfenicol

110

12

11

11

22

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

111

13

11

23

3rd generation cephalosporins

0

Cefotaxim

110

13

23

2

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

110

11

11

11

22

1

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

116

51

31

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

113

31

14

11

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

110

11

11

23

11

Gentamicin

111

14

51

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

110

22

12

21

1

Penicillins

Ampicillin

115

51

12

11

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

113

31

11

11

21


Estonia 2006 77

Table Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of S.Enteritidis in animals

n = Number of resistant isolates

S. EnteritidisCattle (bovine animals) Pigs Gallus gallus (fowl) Turkeys

Isolates out of a monitoringprogramme

no

Number of isolatesavailable in the laboratory

11

Antimicrobials: N n N n N n N nTetracyclines

Tetracyclin 11 1Amphenicols

Chloramphenicol 11 2Florfenicol 11 0

CephalosporinsCephalothin 11 1Cefotaxim 11 0

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin 11 0

QuinolonesNalidixic acid 11 6

SulfonamidesSulfonamide 11 3

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin 11 0Gentamicin 11 1Kanamycin 11 0

PenicillinsAmpicillin 11 5

Trimethoprim +sulfonamides

11 3

Fully sensitive 11 2

Resistant to 1 antimicrobial 11 3

Resistant to 2antimicrobials

11 3


11 2

Resistant to >4antimicrobials

11 1


Estonia 2006 78


sceptib

ility testing of S. E

nteritidis in Meat from broilers (G

allus gallus)

quantitative data [D

iffusion method]

Num




l) or zone (m


S. Enteritidis

Meat from broilers (G

allus g

allus)


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

12

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

121

15

51

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

120

11

33

31

Florfenicol

120

12

24

21

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

120

11

62

2


0

Cefotaxim

120

15

14

1

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

120

16

41

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

1211

111

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

120

11

11

12

23

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

120

22

34

1

Gentamicin

120

73

2

Kanam

ycin

120

36

3

Penicillins

Ampicillin

121

13

31

22

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

120

15

31

2


Estonia 2006 79


sceptib

ility testing of S. T

yphimurium in Cattle (bovine animals) quantitative

data [D

iffusion method]

Num




l) or zone (m


S. Typhimurium



programme

no

Num


the laboratory

7

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

72

11

11

21

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

70

11

22

1

Florfenicol

70

12

21

1

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

70

21

21

1


0

Cefotaxim

70

13

21

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

70

31

11

1

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

70

11

22

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

72

21

12

1

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

72

22

21

Gentamicin

70

23

11

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

70

11

11

12

Penicillins

Ampicillin

72

23

11

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

72

21

11

11


Estonia 2006 80


sceptib


yphimurium in Pigs quantitative data [D

iffusion

method]

Num




l) or zone (m


S. Typhimurium

Pigs


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

1

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

10

1

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

10

1

Florfenicol

10

1

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

10

1


0

Cefotaxim

10

1

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

10

1

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

10

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

10

1

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

10

1

Gentamicin

10

1

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

10

1

Penicillins

Ampicillin

10

1

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

10

1


Estonia 2006 81

Table Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of S.Typhimurium in animals


S. TyphimuriumCattle (bovine animals) Pigs Gallus gallus (fowl) Turkeys


no no


7 1


Tetracyclin 7 2 1 0Amphenicols

Chloramphenicol 7 0 1 0Florfenicol 7 0 1 0

CephalosporinsCephalothin 7 0 1 0Cefotaxim 7 0 1 0

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin 7 0 1 0

QuinolonesNalidixic acid 7 0 1 0

SulfonamidesSulfonamide 7 2 1 0

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin 7 2 1 0Gentamicin 7 0 1 0Kanamycin 7 0 1 0

PenicillinsAmpicillin 7 2 1 0


7 2 1 0

Fully sensitive 7 4 1 1

Resistant to 1 antimicrobial 7 1 1 0


7 1 1 0


7 1 1 0


Estonia 2006 82


sceptib


yphimurium in All foodstuffs quantitative data

[Diffusion method]

Num




l) or zone (m


S. Typhimurium

All foodstuffs


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

3

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

32

21

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

31

11

1

Florfenicol

30

12

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

30

11

1


0

Cefotaxim

30

3

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

30

11

1

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

30

11

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

32

21

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

32

21

Gentamicin

30

12

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

30

12

Penicillins

Ampicillin

32

21

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

31

11

1


Estonia 2006 83

Table Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Salmonella in animals


Salmonella spp.Cattle (bovineanimals)

Pigs Gallus gallus (fowl) Turkeys Sheep


no no no


7 4 3

Antimicrobials: N n N n N n N n N nTetracyclines

Tetracyclin 7 0 4 0 3 0Amphenicols

Chloramphenicol 7 0 4 0 3 0Florfenicol 7 0 4 0 3 0

CephalosporinsCephalothin 7 0 4 0 3 0Cefotaxim 7 0 4 0 3 0

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin 7 0 4 0 3 0

QuinolonesNalidixic acid 7 0 4 0 3 0

SulfonamidesSulfonamide 7 0 4 0 3 0

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin 7 1 4 0 3 0Gentamicin 7 0 4 0 3 0Kanamycin 7 0 4 0 3 0

PenicillinsAmpicillin 7 0 4 0 3 0


7 0 4 0 3 0

Fully sensitive 7 6 4 4 3 3


Footnote

S.Typhimurium and S.Enteritidis are not included into this table.


Estonia 2006 84

Table Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Salmonella spp. in food


Salmonella spp.Meat from bovineanimals

Meat from pig Meat from broilers(Gallus gallus)

Meat from otherpoultry species

All foodstuffs


no no no no


2 2 13 4

Antimicrobials: N n N n N n N n N nTetracyclines

Tetracyclin 2 0 2 1 13 1 4 2Amphenicols

Chloramphenicol 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 1Florfenicol 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0

CephalosporinsCephalothin 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0Cefotaxim 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0

QuinolonesNalidixic acid 2 0 2 0 13 11 4 0

SulfonamidesSulfonamide 2 0 2 1 13 0 4 2

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin 2 0 2 1 13 0 4 2Gentamicin 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0Kanamycin 2 0 2 0 13 0 4 1

PenicillinsAmpicillin 2 0 2 1 13 1 4 1


2 0 2 0 13 0 4 2

Fully sensitive 2 2 2 1 13 1 4 2

Resistant to 1 antimicrobial 2 0 2 0 13 11 4 0


2 0 2 0 13 1 4 0


2 0 2 0 13 0 4 0


2 0 2 1 13 0 4 0


2 0 2 0 13 0 4 2


Estonia 2006 85


sceptib

ility testing of Other serotypes in Cattle (bovine animals) quantitative

data [D

iffusion method]

Num




l) or zone (m


Other serotypes



programme

no

Num


the laboratory

7

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

70

23

11

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

70

11

13

1

Florfenicol

70

11

21

11

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

70

11

12

2


0

Cefotaxim

70

11

11

12

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

70

11

22

1

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

70

23

11

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

70

11

21

2

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

71

12

11

11

Gentamicin

70

31

11

1

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

70

13

11

1

Penicillins

Ampicillin

70

11

11

3

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

70

32

2


Estonia 2006 86


sceptib

ility testing of Other serotypes in Pigs quantitative data [D

iffusion

method]

Num




l) or zone (m


Other serotypes

Pigs


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

4

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

40

11

11

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

40

11

11

Florfenicol

40

12

1

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

40

11

11


0

Cefotaxim

40

11

11

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

40

11

11

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

40

13

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

40

21

1

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

40

12

1

Gentamicin

40

12

1

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

40

21

1

Penicillins

Ampicillin

40

11

2

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

40

11

11


Estonia 2006 87


sceptib

ility testing of Other serotypes in Sheep quantitative data [D

iffusion

method]

Num




l) or zone (m


Other serotypes

Sheep


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

3

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

30

11

1

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

30

11

1

Florfenicol

30

21

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

30

11

1


0

Cefotaxim

30

3

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

30

3

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

30

12

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

30

11

1

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

30

11

1

Gentamicin

30

12

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

30

11

1

Penicillins

Ampicillin

30

11

1

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

30

21


Estonia 2006 88

Footnote

Salmonella enterica subsp. arizonae


Estonia 2006 89


sceptib

ility testing of Other serotypes in All foodstuffs quantitative data

[Diffusion method]

Num




l) or zone (m


Other serotypes

All foodstuffs


programme

no

Num


the laboratory

6

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=6

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

>=35

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

61

11

31

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

60

11

21

1

Florfenicol

60

11

11

11

Cephalosporins

Cephalothin

60

11

11

11


0

Cefotaxim

60

11

11

11

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

60

21

12

Enrofloxacin

0

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

60

11

11

11

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

61

11

11

11

Trimethoprim

0

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

61

11

22

Gentamicin

60

31

11

Neomycin

0

Kanam

ycin

61

11

11

11

Penicillins

Ampicillin

50

11

12

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

61

13

11


Estonia 2006 90

Footnote

VFL

S.Derby, S.Lexington, S.arizonae, S.New

port, Salmonella sp

p., S.Infantis


Estonia 2006 91

Table Breakpoints for antibiotic resistance testing in Animals

Test Method Used

Disc diffusion

Agar dilution

Broth dilution

Etest

Standards used for testing

NCCLS

Salmonella Standard for

breakpointBreakpoint concentration (microg/ ml) Range tested concentration

(microg/ ml)Disk content Breakpoint Zone diameter (mm)

Susceptible<=

Intermediate Resistant>

lowest highest microg Susceptible>=

Intermediate Resistant<=

AmphenicolsChloramphenicol CLSI 30 18 12

Florfenicol CLSI 30 19 14

TetracyclinesTetracyclin CLSI 30 19 14

CephalosporinsCephalothin CLSI 30 18 14

Cefotaxim CLSI 30 23 14

3rd generationcephalosporins

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin BD 5 21 15

Enrofloxacin QuinolonesNalidixic acid CLSI 30 19 13

Trimethoprim

SulfonamidesSulfonamide CLSI 300 17 12

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin CLSI 10 15 11

Gentamicin CLSI 10 15 12

Neomycin Kanamycin CLSI 30 18 13


CLSI 25 16 10

PenicillinsAmpicillin CLSI 10 17 13


Estonia 2006 92

Table Breakpoints for antibiotic resistance testing in Food

Test Method Used

Disc diffusion

Agar dilution

Broth dilution

Etest


NCCLS

Salmonella Standard for

breakpointBreakpoint concentration (microg/ ml) Range tested concentration

(microg/ ml)Disk content Breakpoint Zone diameter (mm)

Susceptible<=




AmphenicolsChloramphenicol CLSI 30 18 12

Florfenicol CLSI 30 19 14

TetracyclinesTetracyclin CLSI 30 19 14

CephalosporinsCephalothin CLSI 30 18 14

Cefotaxim CLSI 30 23 14


FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin BD 5 21 15

Enrofloxacin QuinolonesNalidixic acid CLSI 30 19 13

Trimethoprim

SulfonamidesSulfonamide CLSI 300 17 12

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin CLSI 10 15 11

Gentamicin CLSI 10 15 12

Neomycin Kanamycin CLSI 30 18 13


CLSI 25 16 10

PenicillinsAmpicillin CLSI 10 17 13


Estonia 2006 93

2.2. CAMPYLOBACTERIOSIS


A. Thermophilic Campylobacter general evaluation


Human campylobacteriosis is one of the most important diseases in Estonia. This disease is on thesecond position according to the number of cases behind salmonellosis in the country.The number of human cases in the year 2006 was exactly the same as in the previous year. TheCampylobacter jejuni is the pathogen most frequently discovered in humans and in poultry meat.4 family outbreaks with unknown food implicated were reported in 2006. 3 of them were caused byC.jejuni and 1 by Campylobacter spp.


According to the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectoius Diseases theherds as well as animals sent to the artificial fertilization stations should be examined on the presenceof Campylobacter in semen. As official samples the herds should be examined in the quantitiesprovided by the monitoring plan of the Veterinary and Food Board. In the year 2006 165 sampleshave been investigated with no positive results.224 intact caecae samples taken from broilers at time of evisceration at slaughterhouse wereinvestigated. Each sample consists of 10 caecae taken from 10 birds belonging to the same batch. NoCampylobacter was detected.There are no official monitoring programmes in regard to Campylobacter in feedingstuffs.Food samples are taken in the frames of official food surveillance and in the frames of the monitoringprogramme performed at slaughterhouses. 207 food samples have been tested in 2006, 5 (2,4 %) of them were positive (in 2005 5,5 %). Allpositive samples originate from poultry meat (broilers, not of Estonian origin).C.coli was detected in 3 samples and C.jejuni in 2 samples.As there were no Campylobacter detected in domestic production or animals, no Campylobacterisolates were tested on antimicrobial resistance.


Poultry meat is thought to be the most significant source of infection in humans. In most cases thesources of infection were not laboratory confirmed. C.jejuni is a predominant isolate in humans duringyears.


Estonia 2006 94

2.2.2. Campylobacteriosis in humans

2.2.3. Campylobacter in foodstuffs

A. Thermophilic Campylobacter in Broiler meat and products thereof

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy


Fresh poultry meat has been sampled and tested for the presence of thermophilicCampylobacter. Sampling has been performed by the officials of Veterinary and FoodBoard and samples have been analyzed in Veterinary and Food Laboratory (VFL).

At retail

Official sampling has been performed in the frames of official food surveillanceprogramme of the Health Protection Inspectorate. Samples have been analysed in theHealth Protection Inspectorate`s laboratories of Microbiology.






At retail




Fresh meat

At retail

Fresh meat





Estonia 2006 95

The samples of 25 g each taken from broiler meat, handled hygienically, placed inrefrigerated containers and sent immediately to the laboratory.

At retail

The samples of 25 g each taken from broiler meat, handled hygienically, placed inrefrigerated containers and sent immediately to the laboratory.



The sample was considered positive in case of Thermophilic Campylobacter isolation.

At retail

A sample where Thermofilic Campylobacter was isolated.






At retail

Bacteriological method: NMKL 119:1990



Sampling has been performed randomly at meat processing plant, at border control and retaillevel in the frames of the official food surveillance plans.


The own check plan of the food handling establishment should be improved.


Campylobacter jejuni is a pathogen subject to registration since 2000 according to the InfectiousAnimal Disease Control Act and the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of NotifiableDiseases and Diseases subject to Registration". Laboratories inspecting the safety and quality of the products on enterprises which handle food ofanimal origin are required to notify the Veterinary and Food Board about the isolation of pathogenswhich may cause infectious animal diseases subject to notification or registration or about suspicionof the occurrence of such pathogens in raw food material or products. In addition, such laboratoriesare obliged to notify the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation of zoonotic agents.


Estonia 2006 96

Laboratories report quarterly the list of registered pathogens in food to the Veterinary and FoodBoard.


Altogether 5 (6,3 %) of 80 poultry meat samples tested in the year 2006 on presence ofCampylobacter were positive (in 2005 7,5 %). Mostly meat from broiler was contaminated.All positive samples were not of Estonian origin.C.jejuni was detected in 2 samples, C.coli in 3 samples.


The occurrence of Campylobacter in fresh broiler meat is quite high. But in comparison with theprevious year the percent of positive samples decreased:2004 56 samples taken and 26,8 % of them were positive,2005 278 samples and 7,5 % of them were positive,2006 80 samples 6,3 % positive.In 2006 the prevalent Campylobacter specie was C.coli, in 2005 C.jejuni.


The most of the human cases of campylobacteriosis are foodborne. In the year 2006 3 outbreaks werenot linked to any kind of food and 1 outbreak was linked to consumption of pork. All the cases werenot laboratory confirmed.Most of the the cases of human campylobacteriosis were caused by C.jejuni.


Estonia 2006 97

Table Campylobacter in poultry meat


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for thermophilic Cam

pylobacter sp

p.

C. coli

C. lari

C. jejuni

C. upsaliensis

thermophilic Cam

pylobacter sp

p., unspecified


fresh in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling (1)



meat preparation intended to be eaten cooked at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 15 0

Meat from turkey fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0


Meat from poultry, unspecified


VFB single 25 g 6 0

(1) : Positive samples are not of Estonian origin.

Footnote

Surveillance official control, official sampling


Estonia 2006 98

Table Campylobacter in other food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested


pylobacter sp

p.

C. jejuni

C. coli

C. upsaliensis

C. lari

thermophilic Cam

pylobacter sp

p., unspecified

Meat from pig fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 18 0

minced meat intended to be eatencooked




meat products at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0

Meat from bovine animals fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 42 0






Milk, cows' raw


Estonia 2006 99



dairy products, not specified readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 2 0

Meat, mixed meat minced meat intended to be eatencooked


meat products at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 4 0

Fishery products, unspecified readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0

Bakery products cakes at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0

Footnote



Estonia 2006 100

2.2.4. Campylobacter in animals

A. Thermophilic Campylobacter in Gallus gallus

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Monitoring is performed on broiler slaughter batches at slaughterhouse. The sampling is basedon random selection regarding sampling days and batches are to be sampled. Sampling wasperformed all the year round. A 12month period was divided in 12 periods of 1 month. In eachmonth 1/ 12th of the total sampke size was taken. Samples were taken from 1 slaughterhouse.The number of batches sampled were calculated according to the number of batchesslaughtered at the slaughterhouse in 2005 and according to the draft "Technical specificationsfor an EU monitoring scheme for Campylobacter in broiler chickens". Sample taken is intact ceacae. Ceacal samples are taken at time of evisceration. Each sampleconsists of 10 caecae taken from the birds belonging to the same slaughter batch.


At slaughter



At slaughter

Other: intact caecae


At slaughter

Sample taken is intact ceacae. Ceacal samples are taken at time of evisceration. Eachsample consists of 10 caecae taken from the birds belonging to the same slaughterbatch.Caecal samples are transported as intact caecae to the laboratory as soon as possible.At the laboratory, the ceacal contents are aseptically removed and pooled to 1composite sample.

Case definition

At slaughter

A slaughter batch is considered positive for Campylobacter spp. if the presence of theagent is confirmed in the pooled sample from this batch.



Estonia 2006 101

At slaughter

Other: according to draft techn.specifications SANCO/ 3487/ 2005


The supervision official should inform the veterinarian performing supervision of the broilers farm.The infection sources and their spreading ways should be investigated and eliminated.


Detection of Campylobacter in poultry is not notifiable.


No positive results in 2006.


No positive results were received in 2006. But it is very early to make any conclusion, as 2006 wasthe first year when the sampling of ceacal samples started.In 2005 only broilers neck skin samples were at slaughterhouse. Some positive results werediscovered.


In 2006 4 Campylobacter outbreaks were reported (3 with C.jejuni as a causative agent and 1 Campylobacter spp.). No one of them was linked to the consumption of broiler meat.


Estonia 2006 102

Table Campylobacter in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested


pylobacter sp

p.

C. jejuni

C. coli

C. lari

C. upsaliensis

thermophilic Cam

pylobacter sp

p., unspecified

Gallus gallus (fowl) broilers at slaughterhouse animalsample Monitoring monitoring survey (1)

VFB slaughterbatch

224 0

(1) : Intact caeca samples were taken at time of evisceration. Each sample consist of 10 subsamples caecal samples taken from 10 birds.

Footnote

Monitoring Campylobacter monitoring at slaughterhouse, official sampling


Estonia 2006 103

2.2.5. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter isolates

A. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and coli in poultry



Campylobacter isolates that originate from samples that routinely come to the Veterinary andFood Laboratory in the frames of official control or monitoring programmes performed by VFBofficials.


Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in poultry of Estonian origin in all laboratories areincluded in monitoring. Isolates are stored and then sent to the VFL central laboratory, whichperforms antimicrobial resistance testing


Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in poultry of Estonian origin are included inmonitoring. Selection of isolates depends on amount of isolates in laboratory. Usually 1 isolateper sample.


All isolates and data concerning them are collected from local laboratories in the VFL CentralLaboratory.All isolates are tested in the VFL Central Laboratory.



VetMIC Camp for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter jejuni andhippuratenegative thermophilic Campylobacer spp. SVA Dept. of antiobiotics, SE75189Uppsala, Sweden.The inoculum density in the panels was 50250 CFU/ ml. The panels are incubated in amicroaerophilic atmosphere +37 +/ 1,0 for 4048 h.Control strain: Campylobacter jejuni ATCC 33560.The antimicrobials included in monitoring are oxytetracycline, enrofloxacin, streptomycin,gentamicin, erythromycin, ampicillin.


Cutoff values originate from Nordic Suggestions "Microbiological cutoff values" Meeting inOslo 13.02.2004.




Estonia 2006 104

Only Campylobacter isolates derived from domesic poultry are included into monitoring.


No Campylobacter isolates were detected in 2006, thus no antimicrobial resistance testing wereperformed.

B. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and coli in foodstuff derivedfrom cattle





Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in foodstuffs of Estonian origin in all laboratoriesare included in monitoring. Isolates are stored and then sent to the VFL central laboratory,which performs antimicrobial resistance testing.


Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in foodstuffs of Estonian origin are included inmonitoring. Selection of isolates depends on amount of isolates in laboratory. Usually 1 isolateper sample.





Resistance testing is performed using dilution method.Antimicrobials used in monitoring are Gentamicin, Ampicillin, Erythromycin, Tetracycline,Enrofloxacin and Nalidixic acid.


No Campylobacter isolates were detected in foodstuffs derived from cattle in 2006.

C. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and coli in foodstuff derivedfrom pigs


Estonia 2006 105

Additional information

As no positive samples has been detected, no antimicrobial testing were performed.

D. Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and coli in foodstuff derivedfrom poultry





Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in foodstuffs of Estonian origin in all laboratoriesare included in monitoring. Isolates are stored and then sent to the VFL central laboratory,which performs antimicrobial resistance testing.


Campylobacter isolates that are discovered in foodstuffs of Estonian origin are included inmonitoring. Selection of isolates depends on amount of isolates in laboratory. Usually 1 isolateper sample.





VetMIC Camp for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Campylobacter jejuni andhippuratenegative thermophilic Campylobacer spp. SVA Dept. of antiobiotics, SE75189Uppsala, Sweden.The inoculum density in the panels was 50250 CFU/ ml. The panels are incubated in amicroaerophilic atmosphere +37 +/ 1,0 for 4048 h.Control strain: Campylobacter jejuni ATCC 33560.The antimicrobials included in monitoring are oxytetracycline, enrofloxacin, streptomycin,gentamicin, erythromycin, ampicillin.


Cutoff values originate from Nordic Suggestions "Microbiological cutoff values" Meeting inOslo 13.02.2004.


Estonia 2006 106



Only Campylobacter isolates derived from foodstuffs of domestic origin are included intomonitoring.


In 2006 there were no Campylobacter isolated from poultry of domestic origin. So no sensitivitytesting was performed.In the year 2005 7 Campylobacter jejuni strains and 2 C.coli strains were obtained for sensitivitytesting.Resistance of C,jejuni isolated from broiler meat was detected to nalidixic acid (2 from 3) andoxytetracycline (2 from 3).Resistance of C.jejuni (1 isolate) isolated from turkey meat was detected to ampicillin, nalidixic acidand enrofloxacin.1 C.coli isolate from broiler meat was fully sensitive.Due to the small amount of Campylobacter isolates it is very difficult to make any decission.


Estonia 2006 107

2.3. LISTERIOSIS


A. Listeriosis general evaluation


During years the number of laboratory confirmed cases of Listeriosis in Estonia has been very low.There was 1 case of human listeriosis recorded in the year 2006 (2 cases in 2004 and 2 cases in 2005).No outbreaks involving Listeria spp. were reported.


Altogether there were 9 samples taken from cattle and 6 samples taken from sheep positive forListeria spp. Listeria monocytogenes was found in 7 samples taken from cattle (in 2005 6) and in 5samples taken from sheep (in 2005 10) in the year 2006.In the year 2006 there were detected 25 (1,9 %) positive samples in readytoeat products (in 2005 30 positive samples). Among readytoeat products taken at retail there was only 1 positive sample raw milk intended for direct human consumption (in 2005 15 readytoeat products (1,4 %) taken atretail were Listeria positive).In 2005 no milk or milk products samples were positive.Presence of Listeria was determined in 10 (7,4 %) of 135 readytoeat fishery products. In 2005 8(13,3%) of 60 investigated readytoeat fishery products contained Listeria monocytogenes.


The number of human cases of listeriosis is very small (12 per year). In all cases Listeriamonocytogenes has been detected.Foodborne transmission is believed to be more important than transmission from animals.


Estonia 2006 108

2.3.2. Listeriosis in humans

A. Listeriosis in humans



Estonia 2006 109

2.3.3. Listeria in foodstuffs

Table Listeria monocytogenes in milk and dairy products


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for L.monocytogenes

Listeria monocytogenes presence in x g

> detection lim

it but =

< 100 cfu/ g

L. m

onocytogenes > 100 cfu/ g

Milk, cows' raw

intended for direct humanconsumption


HPI single 25 g 5 1 1

pasteurised milk at processing plant domestic production Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling



Cheeses made from cows' milk

soft and semisoft



hard

made from raw or lowheattreated milk



made from pasteurised milk


Estonia 2006 110



unspecified





butter in total Surveillance official controls (other thancontrol and eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


cream made from pasteurisedmilk



dairy desserts



milk powder and wheypowder



icecream

made from pasteurisedmilk



dairy products, not specified


Estonia 2006 111

readytoeat in total Surveillance official controls (otherthan control anderadication programmes) official sampling



Infant formula

dried




Footnote



Estonia 2006 112

Table Listeria monocytogenes in other foods


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for L.monocytogenes

Listeria monocytogenes presence in x g

> detection lim

it but =

< 100 cfu/ g

L. m

onocytogenes > 100 cfu/ g





meat products

cooked, readytoeat HPI single 1 g 21 0 0 0




meat preparation



intended to be eatencooked


minced meat



Meat from pig

fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0 0

meat products

cooked, readytoeat HPI single 1 g 2 0 0 0


Estonia 2006 113



unspecified, readytoeat



VFB single 1 g 2 0 0 0

minced meat





meat preparation






fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 1 1

meat products



unspecified, readytoeat


Fish

smoked coldsmoked



hotsmoked


Estonia 2006 114




raw

chilled



frozen



gravad / slightly salted




at processing plant Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling suspect sampling


Crustaceans

unspecified

cooked frozen



Infant formula readytoeat


Meat, mixed meat

meat products





Estonia 2006 115

Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


meat preparation



minced meat



Meat from turkey

meat preparation



meat products



cooked, readytoeat



Meat from poultry, unspecified

meat preparation



meat products



Meat from farmed game landmammals

fresh


Estonia 2006 116



Roe

at processing plant Surveillance official controls(other than control anderadication programmes) official sampling (1)


Fishery products, unspecified

readytoeat




Surimi



Cereals and meals




Bakery products

cakes







Sweets


Fruits

products

canned


Estonia 2006 117




Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling


Vegetables

nonprecut



precut



products



canned


Readytoeat salads






containing mayonnaise


Other processed food productsand prepared dishes

unspecified

readytoeat foods


Estonia 2006 118






Nuts and nut products



(1) : salted roe

Footnote



Estonia 2006 119

2.3.4. Listeria in animals

Table Listeria in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Listeria spp.

L. m

onocytogenes

Listeria spp., unspecified

Cattle (bovine animals) VFL animal 27 9 7 2

Sheep VFL animal 7 6 5 1

Pigs VFL animal 1 0

Footnote

Types of specimen taken were brain, abortion material, internal organs. Brain samples from cattle and sheep wereinvestigated after receiving of negative results performed in the frames of BSE and rabies investigations.


Estonia 2006 120

2.4. E. COLI INFECTIONS


A. Verotoxigenic Escherichia coli infections general evaluation


There were no human cases reported in 2004. In the year 2005 15 human cases of VTEC O157 and in2006 6 human cases were reported. All of them were autochtone cases and all were laboratoryconfirmed.


In the year 2005 the monitoring programme of VTEC O157 started in dairy cows at farm and it wasfollowed in 2006. This monitoring is a part of the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance ofAnimal Infectious Diseases. Animals from farms with more than 100 dairy cows were tested. Theinvestigations show that Verotxigenic E.coli O157 was not detected on big farms with more than 100animals.In 2006 VTEC O157 was detected in dairy cows on 1 small farm with 17 animals. The investigationof that animals was started due to the VTEC human case linked to the consumption of raw cows milkfrom that farm. Samples taken from 13 animals were found to be positive.57 food samples were tested at retail. No positive results were detected.


In 2006 VTEC O157 was detected in dairy cows on 1 small farm with 17 animals. The investigationof that animals was started due to the VTEC human case linked to the consumption of raw cows milkfrom that farm. Samples taken from 13 animals were found to be positive.

Recent actions taken to control the zoonoses

In 2005 the monitoring of VTEC O157 in dairy cows started in the frames of the State Programme onMonitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases. The programme is approved by theDirector general of the Veterinary and Food Board.


Estonia 2006 121

2.4.2. E. Coli Infections in humans

2.4.3. Escherichia coli, pathogenic in foodstuffs

Table VT E. coli in food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Escherichia coli, pathogenic

E.coli, pathogenic, unspecified

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC)

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC) VTEC O157

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC) VTEC, unspecified

Meat from pig fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 7 0





Meat from bovine animals fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 14 0



meat products unspecified, readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 2 0

Milk, cows' raw intended for direct humanconsumption



Estonia 2006 122

Water bottled water at retail HPI single 25 g 1 0


dairy products, not specified readytoeat at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 5 0

Meat, mixed meat minced meat intended to be eatencooked


Bakery products cakes at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 1 0

Footnote



Estonia 2006 123

2.4.4. Escherichia coli, pathogenic in animals

A. Verotoxigenic Escherichia coli in cattle (bovine animals)

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Faecal samples are taken from dairy cows representing farms with more than 100 animals.Sampling is random and farms are located in different counties in Estonia. Sampling isperformed by the officials from Veterinary and Food Board in the frames of the StateProgramme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases. 4 samples shouldbe taken at each farm, one sample per animal. Pooling of samples take place in the laboratory.


Animals at farm

Once a year


Animals at farm

Faeces


Animals at farm

Samples should be taken from the rectum of dairy cows. 1 sample should be taken peranimal, 4 samples per farm. Samples are divided in the laboratory into 2 parts: one partis pooled in the laboratory and sample weight analyzed is 20 g (5 g x 4 samples). Incase of positive result, each sample from the other part should be tested individually.

Case definition

Animals at farm

An animal where VTEC O157 has been isolated.In case of VTEC O157 isolation in pooled feacal sample, each sample should be testedseparately.


Animals at farm

With following modifications: Bacteriological method EVSEN ISO 16654




Estonia 2006 124

Samples are taken in the frames of State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillancce ofAnimal Infectious Diseases which is approved annually by the Director General of theVeterinary and Food Board.


In case of detection VTEC O157 among live animals the local veterinary officer, Veterinary and FoodBoard and the Health Protection Inspectorate county department should be notified. Anepidemiological investigation should be started. Restrictions may be imposed on livestock holdingswhere VTEC O157 is detected. Followup testing will also be conducted.


VTEC O157 and other verotoxigenic strains are notifiable since the year 2000 according to theRegulation of the Ministry of Agriculture No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases and Diseases subject toRegistration".


190 dairy cows from the different farms had been tested, feacal samples from 4 animals per farm.Samples taken from 13 animals were positive.


In the year 2005 the investigation of VTEC O157 presence in dairy cows was started in the frames ofthe State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases andinvestigations followed in 2006. No positive samples have been detected in 2005 and 13 positivesamples were detected in 2006.


A total of 8 cases of VTEC infections were reported in the year 2006 (2005 19 cases). 6 of the caseswere caused by the VTEC O157 (15 in 2005).1 case was linked to consumption of raw cows milk from the farm situated in LaaneVirumaa county.Dairy cows from that farm were tested on presence of VTEC O157. Samples taken from 13 animals(altogether 17 dairy cows were present on the farm) turned to be positive.57 food samples were analyzed at retail with no positive results.


Estonia 2006 125

Table VT E. coli in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Escherichia coli, pathogenic

E.coli, pathogenic, unspecified

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC)

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC) VTEC O157

Verotoxigenic E. coli (VTEC) VTEC, unspecified

Cattle (bovine animals) dairy cows VFB animal 190 13 13 13

Footnote

Milk production farms with more than 100 animals were tested. 4 fecal samples were taken from each farm, one sampleper animal.


Estonia 2006 126

2.5. TUBERCULOSIS, MYCOBACTERIAL DISEASES


A. Tuberculosis general evaluation


Tuberculosis in animals is notifiable since 1962. The last case of bovine tuberculosis had been detected in Estonia in 1986. Estonia consider theEstonian herds tuberculosefree and applied for tuberculosefree status from EC at the end of the year2005 but unfortunately not all specific requirements are fulfilled for the sufficient period of time setout in Directive 64/ 432/ EEC.Tuberculosis Register has been created in 1997. No cases of human tuberculosis caused by M.bovishas been ever reported. The incidence rate of human pulmonary tuberculosis due to M.tuberculosis inEstonia is among the highest in Europe. The prevention and surveillance of human Tuberculosis inEstonia is based on the national prevention programme for TB 20042007.


The disease is notifiable according to the Regulation of the Ministry of Agriculture No 34 "List ofNotifiable DiseaseS and Diseases subject to Registration" and the requirements for controllingtuberculosis of bovine animals are approved by the Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture No 61(in force since 23.04.2004).According to the above mentioned Regulation if Tuberculosis is suspected in a bovine animal theofficial veterinarian is obliged to take an action to confirm the diagnosis and to prevent the spread ofthe disease.Holding infected or suspected of being infected with tuberculosis is subjected under officialrestrictions for effective preventive methods against the spread of the disease. This includes the strictprohibition of all movement and transportation of animals and persons other than official veterinariansand persons concerned with the care of the animals. The infection is eradicated by stamping out of the entire herd. The prophylaxis of tuberculosis hasbeen carried out by avoiding the infection of a tuberculosefree herd and finding out the infectedanimals in time by regular tuberculin testing of the herd. Every year the examination on tuberculosishas been based on the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal InfectiousDiseases, which is approved by the Director General of the Veterinary and Food Board.There were no reported cases of human tuberculosis due to M.bovis in the year 2006. Allbacteriologically confirmed cases in humans have been caused by M.tuberculosis. The increasednumber of multidrug resistant Mycobacterium Tuberculosis strains and coinfection with HIVbecomes a big problem.


Since bovine tuberculosis in cattle seems to be eliminated in Estonia, there is no probability ofcontracting M.bovis infection from domestic animals or domestic animal products.All bacteriologically confirmed cases in humans have been caused by M.tuberculosis.


Estonia 2006 127


Since the year 2005 according to the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of AnimalInfectiuos Diseases and in accordance with Council Directive 97/ 12 all over 6 weeks old cattle(except fattening bulls who are not used for breeding and will be slaughtered after rearing period) aresubject for routine serological testing on tuberculosis at yearly intervals.


Estonia 2006 128

2.5.2. Tuberculosis, Mycobacterial Diseases in humans

2.5.3. Mycobacterium in animals

A. Mycobacterium bovis in bovine animals

Status as officially free of bovine tuberculosis during the reporting year


Estonian bovine herds are not OTF according to EC legislation. Estonia has applied fortuberculosefree status from EC at the end of the year 2005 but unfortunately not all specificrequirements were fulfilled for the sufficient period of time set out in Directive 64/ 432/ EEC.

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Since the year 2005 according to the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance ofAnimal Infectious Diseases and Council Directive 97/ 12 all over 6 weeks old cattle (exceptfattening bulls who are not used for breeding and will be slaughtered after rearing period) aresubject for routine serological testing on tuberculosis at yearly intervals.


All over 6 weeks old cattle (except fattening bulls who are not used for breeding and will beslaughtered after rearing period) are subject for routine serological testing on tuberculosis inaccordance with Council Directive 97/ 12 at yearly intervals.


Other: intradermal tuberculin test


Specimens for bacteriological examination are lymph nodes and internal organs.

Case definition

A positive case is defined as an animal where Mycobacterium bovis has been isolated.


Laboratory diagnostic method used in the VFL is performed according to OIE Manual forDiagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals 2004. Diagnostic tests are tuberculinskin test and microscopy, histology, culture. Confirmation is performed by biochemical testsand PCR. Method is accredited by the Estonian Accreditation Centre.

Vaccination policy

Vaccination against tuberculosis is forbidden in Estonia.


Estonia 2006 129



The State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance of Animal Infectious Diseases is anational programme approved annually by the Director General of the Veterinary and FoodBoard.The Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 61 "Prevention against tuberculosis of bovineanimals" (made in accordance with Community legislation) is in force since 01.05.2004.


Veterinary and Food Board apply following restrictions and measures:declare OTF status invalid,organize epidemiological investigation,ensure that all at least 6 weeks old bovine animals native of tuberculoses positive herds should betuberculin tested according to the EC Regulation 1226/ 2002,all in point 3 mentioned tuberculoses positive animals should be slaughtered,bovine animals could be taken out from the herd only for slaughter,disinfection is required,milk has to be heat treated.


Infection with Mycobacterium bovis is notifiable in bovine animals since 1962 and since 2000 it isnotifiable according to the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34, "List of Notifiable Diseases andDiseases subject to Registration".


All animals given unclear or positive results have undergone second intra dermal tuberculin test orcomparison tuberculin test and in case of positive result have been slaughtered and organ samplescollected for laboratory investigation. All bacteriological samples have been negative in 2006.


Surveillance programme for bovine tuberculoses started in 1962. The last positive case had beenreported in 1986. Consequently thereof we consider our bovine herds free from tuberculoses.Since the year 2005 tuberculoses surveillance programme has been implemented according to the EClegislation.


There is no evidence of contracting domestic tuberculosis from animals. There were no human casesof tuberculosis caused by M.bovis reported during years.

B. Mycobacterium bovis in farmed deer



Estonia 2006 130

There is no farmed deer in Estonia.


Estonia 2006 131

Table Tuberculosis in other animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Mycobacterium

spp.

M. bovis

M. tuberculosis

Mycobacterium

spp., unspecified

Pigs VFL animal 2 0

Turkeys at farm (1) VFL animal 1 1 0 0 1

Gallus gallus (fowl) at farm (2) VFL animal 6 6 0 0 6

(1) : Clinical investigation, organs(2) : Clinical investigation, organs


Estonia 2006 132

Table Bovine tuberculosis data on herds Com

munity cofin

anced eradication programmes

Region

Total num

berTotal num

ber

of

Num

ber of

herds

Num

ber of

positive

Num

ber of

new

Num

ber of

herds

% positive

herds

Indicators

of herds

herds u

nder

the

programme

checked

herds

positive herds

depopulated

depopulated

% herd

coverage

% positive

herds period

herd prevalence

% new

positive

herds herd

incidence

EEST

I 9267

9267

9267

0 0

0 0

0 0

Total

9267

9267

9267

0 0

0 0

100

0 0

Total 1

9267

9267

9267

0 0

0 0

0 0


Estonia 2006 133

Table Bovine tuberculosis data on animals Com

munity cofin

anced eradication programmes

Region

Total num

ber

of animals

Num

ber of

animals to be

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

positive

Slaughtering

Indicators

tested under

the programme

tested

tested

individually

animals

Num

ber of

animals w

ithpositive result

slaughtered or

culled

Total num

ber of

animals

slaughtered

% coverage at

animal level

% positive

animals animal

prevalence

EEST

I 252717

252717

209822

209822

0 0

0 0

Total

252717

252717

209822

209822

0 0

0 83.026

0

Total 1

252717

252717

209822

209822

0 0

0 0


Estonia 2006 134

Table Bovine tuberculosis data on status of herds at the end of the period C

ommunity cofin

anced

eradication programmes

Region

Status of herds and animals u

nder the programme

Total num

ber of

herds and

Unknown

Not free or not officially free

Free or officially

free su

spended

Free

Officially free

animals u

nder the

programme

Last check positive Last check negative

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

Herds

Animals

EEST

I 9267

252717

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

9267

252717

0 0

Total

9267

252717

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

9267

252717

0 0

Total 1

9267

252717

0 0

0 0

9267

252717

0 0

9267

252717

0 0


Estonia 2006 135

2.6. BRUCELLOSIS


A. Brucellosis general evaluation


The last positive B.abortus case in bovine animals had been registered in 1961. B. melitensis in goat and sheep has never been reported in Estonia. There were no cases of humanbrucellosis registered in Estonia since 1957.


Estonian bovine and sheep herds are not OBF according to the EC legislation. Estonia has applied forbrucellosis free status from EC at the end of the year 2005, but unfortunately not all specificrequirements were fulfilled for the sufficient period of time set out in the Directive 64/ 432/ EEC.Since 2005 the brucellosis surveillance programme in bovine animals are implemented according tothe EC legislation.No official surveillance programmes for Brucella detection in food exists in Estonia.No human cases were recorded during the last 38 years, so the situation seems to be stable.


As brucellosis in production animals has not been detected during the last 44 years, the risk of humansobtaining brucellosis from Estonian animal products is negligible.


Estonia 2006 136

2.6.2. Brucellosis in humans

2.6.3. Brucella in foodstuffs

2.6.4. Brucella in animals

A. Brucella abortus in bovine animals

Status as officially free of bovine brucellosis during the reporting year


Estonian bovine herds are not OBF according to the EC legislation. Estonia has applied forbrucellosis free status from EC at the end of the year 2005 but unfortunately not all specificrequirements are fulfilled for the sufficient period of time set out in the Directive 64/ 432/ EEC.

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Compulsory bacteriological investigation of all abortions.All over 24 month old cattle are subject to routine serological testing for brucellosis (exceptfattening bulls who are not used for breeding and will be slaughtered after rearing period).Dairy cows: milk samples are tested serologically.Other cattle: blood samples are tested serologically.Bulls in the artificial insemination centres: blood samples are tested serologically once a year.Sampling is performed by the VFB official veterinarians and authorized veterinarians. Samplesare taken at farm.Sampling is a part of a permanent monitoring scheme.


All over 24 month old cattle (except fattening bulls who are not used for breeding and will beslaughtered after rearing period).Bulls in the artificial insemination centres tested serologically blood samples are taken once ayear.


Other: milk, blood


Pooled milk samples (10 animals) from cows and pooled blood samples (10 animals) fromheifers and bulls.Abortion fetuses and fetal membranes.

Case definition

An animal from which B.abortus has been isolated.


Estonia 2006 137


Laboratory diagnostic method used in VFL is performed according to OIE Manual forDiagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals 2004. Diagnostic test serology (indirectELISA) for monitoring purposes. If samples react positively in screening tests, confirmationshould be performed by the other serological tests (CFT, CompELISA).For clinical cases (abortion) microbiological examination for isolation and identification ofbacteria. Confirmation is done by biochemical tests and the slide agglutination test and sendingBrucella strain to the reference laboratory. Method is accredited by the Estonian Accreditation Centre.

Vaccination policy

Vaccination against brucellosis is forbidden in Estonia.



Sampling is performed in the frames of the State Programme on Monitoring and Surveillance ofAnimal Infectious Diseases the national programme approved annually by the DirectorGeneral of the Veterinary and Food Board.Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 120 "Prevention against brucellosis of bovine animals"(made up in accordance with Community legislation) is in force since 06.08.2004.


Veterinary and Food Board apply following restrictions and measures:declare OBF status invalid,organize epidemiological investigation,all bovine animals and brucellosis susceptible animals in the epidemic point should be destroyed,Veterinary and Food Board may allow to send clinically healthy animals for slaughter to theappointed slaughterhouse. Slaughter should be performed separately from the other animals. Meatshould be heat treated,movement of the people, cars and animals to the epidemic point and out could be allowed only byauthority of the Veterinary and Food Board,disinfection is required,milk should be heat treated.


Infection with Brucellosis is notifiable in bovine, ovine and swine animals since 1962 and since 2000it is notifiable according to the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseasesand Diseases subject to Registration".


All samples have been negative in 2006.



Estonia 2006 138

Surveillance programme for bovine brucellosis started in 1962. The last positive case has beenrecorded in 1961. Consequently thereof we consider our bovine herds free from brucellosis.Since the year 2005 brucellosis surveillance programme has been implemented according to the EClegislation.No human cases registered since 1957.


The risk of humans contracting brucellosis from Estonian animal products is considered negligible.

B. Brucella melitensis in sheep

Status as officially free of ovine brucellosis during the reporting year


Estonian sheep herds are not OBF according to the EC legislation.During 44 years there were no positive B.melitensis cases reported. Consequently thereof weconsider our sheep herds free from brucellosis.

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Blood samples are taken from parent stock of breeding herds once a year and analyzedserologically.


Once a year.


Blood


Serology individual blood sample.Bacteriology samples from abortion material, udder secretions or from tissues removed atpostmortem.

Case definition

An animal from which B.melitensis has been isolated.


Laboratory diagnostic method used in the VFL is performed according to OIE Manual forDiagnostic Tests and Vaccines 2004.For monitoring purposes: serology Rose Bengal Test (antigen produced by VLA), a furthertest is a Complement Fixation Test.


Estonia 2006 139

For clinical cases: microbiological examination for isolation and identification of bacteria.Confirmation is done by biochemical tests and the slide agglutination test and sending Brucellastrain to a reference laboratory. Method is accredited by the Estonian Accreditation Centre.

Vaccination policy

Vaccination against brucella is forbidden in Estonia.



Sampling is performed in the frames of the State Programme on Monitorning and Surveillanceof Animal Infectious Diseases. It is a national programme which is approved annually by theDirector General of the Veterinary and Food Board.


There is no special Regulation for Brucella prevention in sheep and goats.According to the Infectious Animal Disease Control Act of June 16, 1999 Veterinary and Food Board(competent authority) have the right to:issue orders relating to infectious animal disease control which arise from this Act and are mandatoryfor the keepers of animals, persons engaged in the purchase, sale or transport of animals, organizers ofanimal exhibitions, competitions, fairs or auctions, handlers of animal products, and all personspresent at the outbreak site or in the protection zone or surveillance zone;require the keepers of animals to mark the animals such that they could be identified and to demandthat keepers of animals maintain a list of the animals;require keepers of animals to permit diagnostic testing, immunization or treatment of suspected ordiseased animals, or to prohibit such activities;demand to perform changes in the organization and conditions of keeping animals at the enterprise orlivestock building or construction;establish the procedure for the grazing of animals;establish the procedure for the preservation and use of animal droppings;establish additional veterinary requirements for the enterprise activities;establish special requirements for trade of animals, for organization of animal exhibitions andcompetitions and for the removal of animals from their permanent location for another reason, or toprohibit such activities;demand that persons present at the outbreak site use protective clothing, and to determine theprocedure for the use and disinfection of protective clothing and equipment;issue orders for the maintenance and disinfection of livestock buildings and constructions and for theeradication of insect and rodent vermin therein;issue orders for the harmless rendering of animal droppings and for the harmless rendering ordestruction of polluted products or inventory;restrict and prohibit the handling and transport of animals which are susceptible to or which mayspread an infectious animal disease and of products originating from such animals;designate animals for slaughter in order to conduct additional diagnostic tests or to prevent the spreadof the infectious animal disease;establish the procedure for slaughtering of wild animals;


Estonia 2006 140

establish the procedure for the use, disposal and harmless rendering of the animal products and animalwaste;involve a veterinarian who holds an activity license in relation to the prevention or control of theinfectious animal disease on the basis of an application from or the consent of the veterinarian, theextent and the territory of the activity should be indicated in a written agreement.


Infection with Brucella is notifiable in bovine, ovine and swine animals since 1962 and since 2000 itis notifiable according to the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseasesand Diseases subject to Registration".


All samples have been negative in 2006.


Surveillance programme for Brucella in sheep started since 1962. Untill now no positive B.melitensiscases were reported.


As there were no registered cases of brucellosis in sheep since 1962, the risk of obtaining humanbrucellosis in Estonia is negligible.

C. Brucella melitensis in goats

Monitoring system


Blood


Individual blood sample for serology.

Case definition

An animal from which B.melitensis has been isolated.


Laboratory diagnostic method used in the VFL is performed according to OIE Manual ofDiagnostic Tests and Vaccines 2004.For monitoring purposes serology is used: Rose Bengal Test (antigen produced by VLA), afurther test is a Complement Fixation TestFor suspected or clinical cases microbiological examination of isolation and identification ofbacteria. Confirmation is performed by biochemical tests and the slide agglutination test andsending Brucella strain to a reference laboratory.


Estonia 2006 141

Method is accredited by the Estonian Accreditation Centre.



Sampling is performed in the frames of the State Programme on Monitorning and Surveillanceof Animal Infectious Diseases. It is a national programme which is approved annually by theDirector General of the Veterinary and Food Board.


There is no special Regulation for Brucella prevention in sheep and goats.According to the Infectious Animal Disease Control Act of June 16, 1999 Veterinary and Food Board(competent authority) have the right to:issue orders relating to infectious animal disease control which arise from this Act and are mandatoryfor the keepers of animals, persons engaged in the purchase, sale or transport of animals, organizers ofanimal exhibitions, competitions, fairs or auctions, handlers of animal products, and all personspresent at the outbreak site or in the protection zone or surveillance zone;require the keepers of animals to mark the animals such that they could be identified and to demandthat keepers of animals maintain a list of the animals;require keepers of animals to permit diagnostic testing, immunization or treatment of suspected ordiseased animals, or to prohibit such activities;demand to perform changes in the organization and conditions of keeping animals at the enterprise orlivestock building or construction;establish the procedure for the grazing of animals;establish the procedure for the preservation and use of animal droppings;establish additional veterinary requirements for the enterprise activities;establish special requirements for trade of animals, for organization of animal exhibitions andcompetitions and for the removal of animals from their permanent location for another reason, or toprohibit such activities;demand that persons present at the outbreak site use protective clothing, and to determine theprocedure for the use and disinfection of protective clothing and equipment;issue orders for the maintenance and disinfection of livestock buildings and constructions and for theeradication of insect and rodent vermin therein;issue orders for the harmless rendering of animal droppings and for the harmless rendering ordestruction of polluted products or inventory;restrict and prohibit the handling and transport of animals which are susceptible to or which mayspread an infectious animal disease and of products originating from such animals;designate animals for slaughter in order to conduct additional diagnostic tests or to prevent the spreadof the infectious animal disease;establish the procedure for slaughtering of wild animals;establish the procedure for the use, disposal and harmless rendering of the animal products and animalwaste;involve a veterinarian who holds an activity license in relation to the prevention or control of theinfectious animal disease on the basis of an application from or the consent of the veterinarian, theextent and the territory of the activity should be indicated in a written agreement.



Estonia 2006 142

Infection with Brucella is notifiable in bovine, ovine and swine animals since 1962 and since 2000 itis notifiable according to the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseasesand Diseases subject to Registration".


During 2006 no positive results were received.


Brucellosis in animals and in humans is very rare disease in Estonia.B.melitensis in goats has never been reported.Human cases of brusellosis had not be diagnosed during 49 years.


Estonia 2006 143

Table Brucellosis in other animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Brucella sp

p.

B. m

elitensis

B. abortus

B. suis

Brucella sp

p., unspecified

Pigs VFL animal 1095 0


Estonia 2006 144

Table Bovine brucellosis in countries and regions that do not receive Com

munity cofin

ancing for

eradication programme

Region

Total num

ber

of

Officially free

herds

Infected

herds

Surveillance

Investigations of suspect cases

existin

gbovine

Serological tests

Examination of bulk

milk samples

Inform

ation about

abortions

Epidemiological investigation

Herds

Animals

Num

ber of

herds

%

Num

ber of

herds

%

Num

ber of

bovine

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

infected

Num

ber of

bovine

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

infected

Num

ber of

notified

Num

ber of

isolations

Num

ber of

abortions

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

suspended

Num

ber of positive animals

Num

ber of

animals

Num

ber of

animals

herds tested

tested

herds tested

herds tested

or pools tested

herds

abortions

whatever cause

of Brucella

infection

due to Brucella

abortus

tested with

serological

blood tests

herds

Serologically

BST

exam

ined

microbio

logically

positive

microbio

logically

EEST

I 9267

252717

0 0

0 0

4740

15804

0 7418

105320

0 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

Total

9267

252717

0 0

0 0

4740

15804

0 7418

105320

0 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0


Estonia 2006 145

Ovine or Caprine Brucellosis in countries and regions that do not receive Com

munity cofin

ancing for

eradication programme

Region

Total num

ber of

existin

g ovine /

caprine

Officially free herds

Infected herds

Surveillance

Investigations of suspect cases

Herds

Animals

Num

ber of herds

%

Num

ber of herds

%

Num

ber of herds

tested

Num

ber of animals

tested

Num

ber of infected

herds

Num

ber of animals

tested with

serological

blood tests

Num

ber of animals

positive serologically

Num

ber of animals

exam

ined microbio

logically

Num

ber of animals

positive microbio

logically

Num

ber of su

spended

herds

EEST

I 2239

58848

0 0

0 0

48

1629

0 0

0 0

0 0

Total

2239

58848

0 0

0 0

48

1629

0 0

0 0

0 0


Estonia 2006 146

2.7. YERSINIOSIS


A. Yersinia enterocolitica general evaluation


Human cases of yersiniosis are reported in Estonia every year. The number of cases varied during theyears 19992006. The peak was mentioned in 1999 (113 cases), then the number of cases variedduring years:2000 60 cases,2001 51,2002 20,2003 31,2004 15,2005 31,2006 42.


There is no special programme for monitoring of Yersinia spp. in animals in Estonia. In 2006Yersinina spp. was isolated from faeces samples and isolation of Yersinia was related to theconfirmation of the presence of crossreacting antibody in case of positive brucellosis serologicalreaction. 2 samples taken from sheep were positive for Yersinia enterocolitica.In 2006 15 fresh meat samples were taken at retail. 3 fresh pig meat samples were positive forYersinia enterocolitica.The number of human cases is unstable and varies during years. A significant part of humaninfections is of domestic origin. Yersiniosis has it`s greatest potential as a zoonosis in young children.


Yersinia infection in humans is mostly foodborne, zoonotic source is often not defined. In most casesthe supposed source of infection in humans is determined on the basis of epidemiologicalinvestigation, but not bacteriologically.


Estonia 2006 147

2.7.2. Yersiniosis in humans

2.7.3. Yersinia in foodstuffs

Table Yersinia in food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Yersinia spp.

Y. enterocolitica

Yersinia spp., unspecified

Y. enterocolitica O:3


Y. enterocolitica unspecified

Meat from pig fresh at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 g 12 3 3 3




at retail Surveillance HPI single 25 2 0

Footnote



Estonia 2006 148

2.7.4. Yersinia in animals

Table Yersinia in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Yersinia spp.

Y. enterocolitica

Yersinia spp., unspecified



Y. enterocolitica unspecified

Sheep VFL animal 43 2 2 2

Footnote

There is no special programme for monitoring of Yersinia spp. Investigations of Yersinia spp. from faeces were related toconfirmation of presence of crossreacting antibody in case, if brucellosis serological reaction was positive.


Estonia 2006 149

2.8. TRICHINELLOSIS


A. Trichinellosis general evaluation


The data of the previous investigations show that trichinellosis had been diagnosed both in wild and infarmed domestic animals in Estonia.The last case of trichinellosis in domestic pig had been diagnosed in 1999. During the last 6 yearsthere were no cases of trichinellosis found in farmed animals. Among wild animals there are still some cases of trichinellosis diagnosed each year. Human trichinellosis is relatevely rare disease in Estonia. The number of human cases per year is verysmall and in the years 20002006 it varied from 0 to 3 cases per year. The peak of incidence wasnoted in the year 1993, when 43 human cases of trichinellosis had been detected.


Investigations show that during years no Trichinella found in domestic farmed animals. At the sametime Trichinellosis was diagnosed in wild animals: wild boars, lynxes and bears.The risk of acquiring human trichinellosis from domestic animals is considered to be very low asTrichinella has not been detected in animals that are usually consumed as food in Estonia.


In most human cases the supposed source of infection is associated with consumption of wild animalsmeat.


Carcases of animals (swine, horse, wild game and etc.) are systematically sampled in slaughterhousesas a part of the postmortem examination.


Estonia 2006 150

2.8.2. Trichinellosis in humans

2.8.3. Trichinella in animals

A. Trichinella in pigs

Number of officially recognised Trichinellafree holdings

There are no officially recognized Trichinellafree holdings in Estonia.

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

General

Samples are taken at the slaughterhouse. Sampling is performed by authorized orofficial veterinarians at post mortem inspection in accordance with the CommissionRegulation 2075/ 2005 requirements.


General

Carcases of domestic swine are systematically sampled in slaughterhouses as a part ofthe postmortem examination.


General

In the case of the whole carcases, a specimen is to be taken from pillar of thediaphragm at the transition to the sinewy part.In the absence of both diaphragm pillars, a specimen is to be taken from the rib part orbreastbone part of the diaphragm or from the jaw muscle, tongue or abdominal musclestongue muscle or the jaw muscle, abdominal muscle.For cuts of meat and frozen samples, a sample of striated muscle is to be taken.


General

According to the requirements of the Commission Regulation 2075/ 2005.

Case definition

General

An animal where Trichinella spp. was detected.



Estonia 2006 151

General

Detection methods described in Chapters I and III of the Annex I of CommissionRegulation 2075/ 2005.



Every swine has to be examined in slaughterhouses at postmortem examination.


Carcases do not leave the premises before the result of the Trichinella examination is found tobe negative.


In case of discovering of Trichina larvae, the animal carcase and the viscera are declared to be unfitfor human consumption and should be directly disposed in accordance with the requirements of theRegulation 1774/ 2002.


Notification is in place since the year 2000 in accordance with the Regulation of the Ministry ofAgriculture No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases and Diseases subject to Registration".

Results of the investigation including description of the positive cases and the verificationof the Trichinella species

No positive cases were reported in the year 2006.

Fattening pigs raised under controlled housing conditions in integrated productionsystem

No positive cases reported.

Breeding sows and boars

No positive cases reported.


The last case of trichinellosis in pigs had been discovered at the private farm in the year 1999. Sincethat time no Trichinella has been found in domestic pigs.


The risk of contracting trichinellosis from domestic pigs is close to zero due to extensive surveillanceprogrammes of swine production in place.


Estonia 2006 152

B. Trichinella in horses

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Carcases are sampled systemtically at the slaughterhouse. Sampling is performed by authorizedor official veterinarians at postmortem examination.


All slaughtered animals intended for human consumption are sampled. Sampling is performedaccording to the requirements of the Regulation 2075/ 2005.


Specimens are to be taken from the lingual or jaw muscle.In case of their lacking, a specimen is to be taken from a pillar of the diaphragm at thetransition to the sinewy part.


In accordance with the Regulation 2075/ 2005.

Case definition

An animal where Trichinella spp. was detected.


In accordance with the Chapter I of the Annex I of Regulation 2075/ 2005

Results of the investigation including the origin of the positive animals

In 2006 there were no positive cases reported.



Every carcase should be examined at postmortem inspection.


See part "Trichinella in pigs".


Notification is in place since the year 2000 according to the Regulation of the Minister of AgricultureNo 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases and Diseases subject to Registration".


No Trichinella is found in horses during years. As there is no tradition to consume horse meat, the


Estonia 2006 153

number of slaughtered horses is not very big (214 horses per year).


Estonia 2006 154

Table Trichinella in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Trichinella sp

p.

T. spiralis

Trichinella sp

p., unspecified

Pigs fattening pigs raised under controlledhousing conditions inintegrated productionsystem

VFB animal 421800 0

not raised under controlledhousing conditions inintegrated productionsystem

VFL animal 18 0

breeding animals unspecified sows and boars VFB animal 16363 0

Solipeds, domestic horses VFB animal 14 0

Wild boars wild VFB, VFL animal 2581 12 12

Bears VFB, VFL animal 28 7 7

Lynx VFL animal 2 2 2


Estonia 2006 155

2.9. ECHINOCOCCOSIS


A. Echinococcus spp. general evaluation


There were no reported cases of echinococcosis in farmed animals in the years 20042006. In 2005 2cases of echinococcosis in wild reindeer had been diagnosed at postmortem inspection.Since 1986 only 2 cases of human echinococcosis were reported. The situation seems to be stable andthe risk for humans to acquire the disease is negligible.


Surveillance and control of Echinococcus spp. is carried out by the meat inspectors according the theRegulation 854/ 2004. Mandatory meat inspection covers all known potential intermediate hostspecies. All carcasses intended for human consumption are inspected for incidence of hydatid cysts.The prevalence of echinococcus in animals intended for human consumption is close to zero.Human echinococcosis is not a public health problem in Estonia.


Human echinococcosis is a very rear disease in Estonia.


Estonia 2006 156

2.9.2. Echinococcosis in humans

2.9.3. Echinococcus in animals

Table Echinococcus in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Echinococcus spp.

E. granulosus

E. m

ultilocularis

Echinococcus spp., unspecified

Cattle (bovine animals) VFB animal 54264 0

Sheep VFB animal 5591 0

Goats VFB animal 14 0

Pigs VFB animal 438228 0

Solipeds, domestic VFB animal 14 0

Reindeers VFB animal 2223 0

Footnote

All animals have been examined at post mortem inspection.


Estonia 2006 157

2.10. TOXOPLASMOSIS


A. Toxoplasmosis general evaluation


Data concerning human cases of toxoplasmosis is available since 1997. During the last 9 years thenumber of human cases of toxoplasmosis varies. The highest incidence rate is detected in 2004 when16 cases were registered. In 2005 there were 5 and in 2006 3 human cases of toxoplasmosisregistered.No special programme is present on monitoring of toxoplasmosis in animals.


There is no official surveillance programme in regard to Toxoplasma in animals. In 2006 2 cats were tested with negative results.There is no enough information about the most common sources of infection.


The supposed source of infection in humans is usually determined by epidemiological investigation,but not bacteriologically.


Estonia 2006 158

2.10.2. Toxoplasmosis in humans

2.10.3. Toxoplasma in animals

Table Toxoplasma in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Toxoplasm

a gondii

Cats VFL animal 2 0


Estonia 2006 159

2.11. RABIES


A. Rabies general evaluation


Rabies is widely spread all over Estonia which area is 45 227 km². Estonia borders Latvia on the southand Russia on the east, the frequency of rabies infections is also high in these countries. Rabies inEstonia originates from wildlife and its main reservoir are red foxes and raccoon dogs.By reports from Russian tsartime, Kiev and Livonian districts were places were rabies frequentlyoccurred. In the year 1900 rabies spread all over the country, excluding islands. In 1930 eradicatedfrom North and Middle Estonia, cases were recorded only in Southern part.Number of registered rabies cases in animals are available from 1950. There was an urban rabies period in 1950 1959, when rabies was diagnosed mainly in domesticanimals. Therefore, compulsory vaccination program of dogs and cats got started in 1953. In 1962 1967 there was rabiesfree period. From 1968 up to the present time salivatic rabies cases are diagnosed in wild and domestic animals in Estonia. The structure of rabiesinfections across species has been relatively stable across the years. Farm animals compose 67 %,dogs and cats 1020 % and wild animals for 7080 % of all cases.The number of infections of farm animals has significantly decreased in bovines: 3 cases of infectionin 2006 (2004 15 cases, 2005 19 cases), which accounts for 2,6 % (2004 4,8 %, 2005 7,1 %) ofthe total number of rabies cases in animals. In the years 2002 2003 rabies cases in farm animalscomposed 56,6 %.In the dogs and cats category, the occurrence of rabies has no any tendency: 23 cases in 2002 (5,5 %),28 cases in 2003 (3,5 %), 20 cases in 2004 6,3 %, 14 cases in 2005 5,2 % and 9 cases in 2006 7,9% of all registered rabies cases in animals. Rabies cases decreased in dogs in the year 2006: 2002 5,7%, 2003 4,2 %, 2004 7,6 %, 2005 7,4 % and 4,3 % in 2006. This may be due to the improvedawareness of pet owners, who vaccinate their cats alongside dogs. Among wild animals, red foxes account for 33 % (2004 29,3 %, 2005 35,7 %), raccoon dogs for52,6 % (2004 48 %, 2005 47,4 %) and other wild animals (badgers, martens, wild boars, deer,rabbits, beavers, squirrels, lynx, minks, weasel, rats, mice etc) for 2,6 % (2004 3,8 %, 2005 3 %) ofall the cases of rabies in wild animals in the year 2006. Although the last mortal case of rabies in humans was registered in Estonia 20 years ago, rabies is stillan important zoonotic disease in Estonia. The number of animal attacks of humans increasedcontinuously over the years 1999 2003 with the peak in the year 2003 (4436). There is noted adecrease in number of attacks in the years 2004 (3763)and 2005 (3334) and a significant decrease inthe year 2006 (2948).


During the years 20012005 the number of rabies cases among animals has grown very quickly, being167 in 2001, 422 in 2002 and in year 2003 the numbers made a sad record 814 cases of rabies werediagnosed. The decrease in number of cases has been noted since the year 2004 314 cases, 266 in theyear 2005 and 114 cases in 2006. In the year 2004 255 rabies cases was diagnosed in wild animals and 59 in domestic animals. In 2005


Estonia 2006 160

there was 230 rabies positive cases diagnosed in wild animals (mostly in foxes and raccoondogs) and37 in domestic animals. In 2006 there were registered 101 rabies cases in wildlife and 13 cases indomestic animals.Rabies is widely distributed in all counties in Estonia, even in the islands Hiiumaa and Saaremaa.Thus the oral vaccination program of wildlife has been performed in 2004 for the first time on thesmall island named Vormsi (about 100 square km). Vaccination was performed 2 times a year.After that in Autumn 2005 the oral vaccination programme in the frames of Transition Facilityprogram started. Bait drop area covered 25 540 km² of Northern part of Estonia.Since the year 2006 the oral vaccination is performed on the whole territory of the country 2 times peryear (in spring and autumn). Vaccine baits are distributed by aircraft. The vaccination will befollowed until no cases of rabies are registered in the country.The analyzes show that the 74 % of vaccine had been eaten by the animals in 2005 and 85 % in 2006.Due to good medical aid in the case of injury and free postexposure immunoprofilaxis for people,which is a part of the National Immunisation Programme financed from the state budget, there wereno reported cases of rabies among people. But there is still a high risk of humans being attacked byinfected animals. As a result of oral vaccination the number of animal attacks is decreasing.


The risk of contracting rabies in Estonia is still high, as the disease is widely spread among animals.There are still a lot of human cases of injury from infected animals every year, but due to the oralvaccination the number of attacks from animals is decreasing.No transmission of rabies to humans has been recorded. People being in contact with wild animals inEstonia should be aware of the risk.


The oral vaccination program of wildlife in the frames of Transition Facility program started inAutumn 2005 (10.10.2005 3.11.2005), when the Northern part of the country was covered.Since the year 2006 the oral vaccination of wildlife is performed on the whole territory of the countrytwice per year (in spring and autumn).The investigations show a significant decrease in number of positive cases among animals and innumber of attacks of humans by animals.The vaccination will be carried out untill no positive cases are present in Estonia.


The oral vaccination of wildlife (started in 2005) in the country shows a significant decrease innumber of positive cases registered in animals:2001 167,2002 422,2003 814,2004 314,2005 266,2006 114 cases.


Estonia 2006 161

2.11.2. Lyssavirus (rabies) in animals

A. Rabies in dogs

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Rabies is diagnosed on the basis of clinical symptoms and in the laboratory by determination ofthe virus antigens from tactile preparations made from brain tissue by immunofluorescencemethod or by the isolation of the virus from brain tissues of an infected animal in cell culturesor test animals.After receiving the information about an animal with the suspicion to be infected with rabies oran animal who has been bitten by animal with rabies suspicion or in unknown state of health,the authorised veterinarian, who services the region, is obliged to check as soon as possible thestate of the animal and to take necessary measures to prevent the spread of infection.


Each animal with rabies suspicion should be examined.


Organs/ tissues: brain


The brain of the animal or its head (in case of small animals the whole carcass) is sent to thelaboratory for analysis.If the brain is damaged, the cervical vertebrae together with the spinal cord have to be sent foranalysis.

Case definition

Clinical diagnosis with laboratory confirmation.Laboratory criteria for diagnosis: detection by direct fluorescent antibody of viral antigens in the brain, if FAT test result issuspicious or negative: isolation (inoculation in cell culture or in a laboratory animal) of rabies virus from braintissue, and detection of rabies nucleic acid in brain tissue (heminested PCR)


Fluorescent Antibody Test (FAT) on smears from hippocampus or medulla oblongata

Vaccination policy

Vaccination of cats and dogs:The animal keeper has to guarantee that his or her cats and dogs are vaccinated.The first vaccination of dogs and cats takes place when the animal is four months old and the second


Estonia 2006 162

vaccination at the age of 12 months. Further on, the animal is vaccinated once a year.At least 30 days has to pass from the vaccination of a hunting dog before it is taken to the forest orplaced into the circumstances where it can meet a wild animal.Animals are vaccinated by the veterinary supervisory officials, authorized veterinarians or licensedveterinarians.The veterinarian keeps record of the vaccinations against rabies and reports to the Veterinary andFood Board according to the rules established by the Director General of the Veterinary and FoodBoard.The veterinarian issues a certificate after animal vaccination at animal keeper request or makes anappropriate entrance on the animal registration document.The animal keeper is obliged to present the vaccination certificate or the registration document withthe appropriate entrance to the veterinary supervisory official or the authorized veterinarian at his orher request.If the veterinarian finds out that a cat or a dog is not vaccinated or that more than 12 months havepassed from its vaccination, the animal has to be vaccinated as soon as possible.Vaccination of farm animals:It is advisable to vaccinate farm animals, which graze in woodland pastures and in pastures that aresurrounded by woodlands. The Veterinary and Food Board have the right to carry out obligatory vaccination of the farm animalsof endangered zones determined by the Board at the expense of resources provided for it.



According to the Regulation of Minister of Agriculture No 67 "Rules for Rabies Prevention" allanimals with rabies suspicion or an animal who has been bitten by an animal with rabiessuspicion or in unknown state of health, the authorized veterinarian, who services the region, isobliged to check the state of the animal as soon as possible. The sample should be taken andsent to the laboratory. Necessary measures to prevent the spread of infection should beprovided.


Rabies in Estonia originates from wildlife and its main reservoir are red foxes and raccoondogs. The oral vaccination programme of wildlife started in autumn 2005 in the frames ofTransition Facility Programme when bait drop area covered only the Northern part of Estonia.In 2006 the whole country was covered by vaccination and the baits were distributed twice ayear (in spring and autumn). Vaccination of wild animals will be performed until no cases ofrabies are registered in Estonia.The investigation of wild animals show that in the year 2006 85 % of vaccine had been eaten byanimals. The number of positive cases significantly decreased from 266 cases registered in2005 to 114 cases in 2006.


If rabies is diagnosed in a cat or a dog on the basis of clinical symptoms or if the animal keeper cannotensure safe isolation of the animal or the animal keeper cannot be identified, the veterinarysupervisory official prescribes compulsory slaughter of the animal. The appropriate slaughter of the


Estonia 2006 163

animal is arranged by the veterinary supervisory official.If rabies is not confirmed within 14 days, the veterinary supervisory official or the authorizedveterinarian can release the animal from isolation after animal`s examination and if necessary, itsvaccination.The cat or dog with rabies or rabies suspicion has to be slaughtered without damaging its head.The veterinary supervisory official or the authorized veterinarian has to take samples from theslaughtered animal, also from the animal who has died during the isolation period and to send thesesamples to the laboratory.After the sample for analysis has been taken the carcass of the animal has to be burnt.If rabies is diagnosed in one animal of the herd the authorized veterinarian has to examine all otheranimals in the herd in order to find typical clinical symptoms of rabies or animals with traces of bites.The veterinary supervisory official has to issue an order for compulsory slaughter of all animals sickwith rabies.After having taken samples, the carcass of the animal has to be burnt immediately or buried pursuantto the prescriptions of the veterinary supervisory official.The animals with the suspicion of rabies have to be isolated for at least 14 days into an areasurrounded by barriers or into a separate closed room pursuant to the orders of the veterinarysupervisory official or the authorized veterinarian.If the infection source is not known, the authorized veterinarian or the veterinary supervisory officialcan order to vaccinate the rest animals in the herd. The herd has to remain under the supervision of thelocal authority of the Veterinary and Food Board for at least 30 days. The animal keeper is obliged tonotify the authorized veterinarian about all health disturbances of the animals.Restrictions for the herd are established and abolished by the head of the local authority of theVeterinary and Food Board in a written form.The following restrictions have to be established for the herd in which an animal has been diagnosedwith rabies or rabies suspicion:prohibition to transfer to another herd until the restrictions are abolished;prohibition to kill the animal for using it as a food until restrictions are abolished;prohibition to use raw milk and raw milk products for food and for sale until the restrictions areabolished.Wild animals with suspicious behavior should be slaughtered pursuant to the orders of the veterinarysupervisory official or the authorized veterinarian without damaging the animal’s head and samplesshould be sent to the laboratory. After samples have been taken the carcass of the wild animal has tobe burnt or buried pursuant to the prescription of the veterinarian.


Rabies is a notifiable disease since 1950 and since 2000 it is notifiable according to the Ministry ofAgriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseases and Diseases subject to Registration".


During the year 2006 56 dog brain tissue have been tested for rabies. 5 of them were positive.

Investigations of the human contacts with positive cases

No data available.



Estonia 2006 164

Rabies in Estonia originates from wildlife and red foxes and raccoon dogs are its main reservoir. Thusthe oral vaccination of wild animals started in the year 2005 and will be performed each year (inspring and autumn) until no cases of rabies are registered in Estonia.


The highest number of human cases of injury in the year 2006 was registered in Harjumaa (Tallincity), Tartumaa and IdaVirumaa counties.2200 (in 2005 2407 bites) dog bites have been registered in the year 2006.The animal attacks on humans were caused in majority by dogs (74,6 %), followed by cats (19 %),raccoon dogs (1,9 %), cows (1,2 %), foxes (1,1 %) and horses (1 %).


Estonia 2006 165

Table Rabies in animals


Sampling unit

Units tested

Total units positive for Lyssavirus (rabies)

unspecified Lyssavirus

European Bat Lyssavirus unspecified

classical rabies virus (genotype 1)

Cattle (bovine animals) VFB animal 41 3 3

Sheep VFB animal 18 0

Goats VFB animal 3 0

Solipeds, domestic VFB animal 7 1 1

Dogs VFB animal 56 5 5

Cats VFB animal 130 4 4

Bats wild VFB animal 1 0

Foxes wild VFB animal 111 38 38

Raccoon dogs wild VFB animal 165 60 60

Badgers wild VFB animal 1 1 1

Marten wild VFB animal 5 0

Wild boars wild VFB animal 2 0

Deer wild roe deer VFB animal 8 0

Rabbits VFB animal 1 0

Poultry, unspecified VFB animal 2 0

Polecats VFB animal 13 0

Weasel VFB animal 10 1 1

Minks VFB animal 3 0

Squirrels VFB animal 4 0

Beavers VFB animal 1 0

Rats VFB animal 1 0

Moose VFB animal 1 0

Lynx VFB animal 3 1 1


Estonia 2006 166

Other animals VFB animal 1 0


Estonia 2006 167

2.12. QFEVER


2.12.2. Coxiella (Qfever) in animals


Estonia 2006 168

2.13. CYSTICERCOSIS, TAENIOSIS


2.13.2. Cysticerci in animals

A. Cysticerci spp., unspecified in animal

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

All slaughtered animals are examined visually at postmortem inspection.


All slaughtered animals intended for human consumption are examined routinely atslaughterhouses.


Other: liver, carcass


Macroscopic examination of carcasses is routinely done at postmortem inspection at theslaughterhouse.

Case definition

A sample (liver) or carcass, where Cysticercus was detected.


Visual examination, microscopy


In case of detecting of Cysticerci the animal carcass or organs are declared as unfit for humanconsumption.


Cysticerci detection in food and in animals is notifiable since 2000 according to the Infectious AnimalDisease Control Act and the Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No 34 "List of Notifiable Diseasesand Diseases subject to Registration". Laboratories investigating the safety and quality of the products on enterprises which handle food ofanimal origin are required to notify the Veterinary and Food Board about the isolation of pathogenswhich may cause infectious animal diseases subject to notification or registration or about suspicionof the occurrence of such pathogens in raw food material or products. In addition, such laboratoriesare obliged to notify the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolation of zoonotic agents.


Estonia 2006 169

Local Veterinary centres notify the local offices of the Health Protection Inspectorate about isolationof zoonotic agents in food and animals.


Cysticerci were found in 8 pigs livers, 3 cases were laboratory confirmed. Cysticerci tenuicollis wasdetected.2 wild boar meat was analyzed in the laboratory, 1 sample was positive for Cysticercus tenuicollisTaenia hydatigena.


Estonia 2006 170

Table Cysticerci in animal


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Cysticerci

Cysticerci sp

p., unspecified

Pigs (1) VFB animal 438228 8 8

Cattle (bovine animals) (2) VFB animal 54264 0

Wild boars (3) VFB animal 1807 0

in total (4) VFL animal 2 1 1

(1) : Examined at postmortem inspection(2) : Examined at postmortem inspection(3) : Examined at postmortem inspection(4) : Private person`s samples

Footnote

Pigs 3 liver samples from 8 positive samples were examined in the laboratory. Cysticercus tenuicollis was detectedWild boar Cysticercus tenuicollis Taenia hydatigena


Estonia 2006 171

3. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC INDICATORS OF ANTIMICROBIALRESISTANCE


Estonia 2006 172

3.1. ESCHERICHIA COLI, NONPATHOGENIC


A. Escherichia coli general evaluation


Notification of human E.coli started in 1970. The peak incidence (1464) of cases has been detected in1976. After that there is noted a decline in a number of cases.There is no monitoring programme on ingvestigation of E.coli in animals.


Since 2001 the investigations of E.coli antimicrobial resistance are performed in the frames of theproject on Monitoring of Antimicrobial Resistance of Zoonotic Agents Detected in Animals fundedby the Ministry of Agriculture. Project leaders are from the Estonian University of Life Sciences.Analyzes are performed by the Veterinary and Food Laboratory. There is no special programme for sampling of faeces for this project. The E.coli isolates are collectedfrom the samples that are coming routinely to the laboratory in the frames of State Programme onMonitoring and Surveillance of Animal Diseases. Samples are taken from the clinically healthyanimals.In the year 2006 antimicrobial resistance of E.coli had been investigated in:11 isolates discovered in samples taken from pigs:3 (27 %) isolates were fully sensitive (in 2005 55 %),4 (36 %) were resistant to 1 antimicrobial (in 2005 23 %),4 (36 %) were resistant to 2 antimicrobials (in 2005 13 %).Isolates were resistant to streptomycin (5), kanamycin (3), gentamicin (2) and ampicillin (1). 23 isolates discovered in samples taken from cattle:10 (43 %) isolates were fully sensitive (in 2005 78 %),11 (47 %) were resistant to 1 antimicrobial (in 2005 8 %),2 (8 %) were resistant to 4 antimicrobials.Isolates were resistant to tetracycline (2), sulphametoxazol (2), streptomycin (3), ampicillin (1),ceftiofur (2) and chloramphenicol (1).


Estonia 2006 173

3.1.2. Antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli, nonpathogenic isolates


Estonia 2006 174


sceptib

ility testing of E. coli in Cattle (bovine animals) quantitative data

[Dilution method]

Num




l) or zone (m


E. coli



programme

yes

Num


the laboratory

23

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=0.03

0.06

0.12

0.25

0.5

12

48

1632

64128

256

512

1024

2048

>2048

lowest

highest

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

232

614

12

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

231

913

1

Florfenicol

230

518

Cephalosporins


00

Cefotaxim

230

913

1

Ceftiofur

232

612

31

1

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

238

158

Enrofloxacin

00

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

230

715

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

00

Sulfamethoxazol

232

105

51

2

Trimethoprim

230

710

6

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

233

314

21

21

Gentamicin

230

217

22

Neomycin

00

Kanam

ycin

230

313

7

Penicillins

Ampicillin

231

212

71

1


Estonia 2006 175

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

00


Estonia 2006 176


sceptib

ility testing of E. coli in Pigs quantitative data [D

ilution method]

Num




l) or zone (m


E. coli

Pigs


programme

yes

Num


the laboratory

11

Antimicrobials:

Nn

<=0.03

0.06

0.12

0.25

0.5

12

48

1632

64128

256

512

1024

2048

>2048

lowest

highest

Tetracyclines

Tetracyclin

110

37

1

Amphenicols

Chloram

phenicol

110

19

1

Florfenicol

110

16

4

Cephalosporins


00

Cefotaxim

110

37

1

Ceftiofur

110

27

2

Fluoroquinolones

Ciprofloxacin

00

Enrofloxacin

110

56

Quinolones

Nalidixic acid

110

19

1

Sulfonamides

Sulfonamide

00

Sulfamethoxazol

110

32

6

Trimethoprim

110

17

3

Aminoglycosides

Streptom

ycin

115

33

5

Gentamicin

110

63

2

Neomycin

00

Kanam

ycin

113

13

43

Penicillins

Ampicillin

111

46

1

Trimethoprim + su

lfonamides

00


Estonia 2006 177

Table Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of E. coli in animals


E. coliCattle (bovine animals) Pigs Gallus gallus (fowl) Turkeys


yes yes


23 11


Tetracyclin 23 2 11 0Amphenicols

Chloramphenicol 23 1 11 0Florfenicol 23 0 11 0

CephalosporinsCefotaxim 23 0 11 0Ceftiofur 23 2 11 0

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin 23 8 0 0Enrofloxacin 0 0 11 0

QuinolonesNalidixic acid 23 0 11 0

SulfonamidesSulfamethoxazol 23 2 11 0

Trimethoprim 23 0 11 0

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin 23 3 11 5Gentamicin 23 0 11 0Kanamycin 23 0 11 3

PenicillinsAmpicillin 23 1 11 1

Fully sensitive 23 10 11 3



23 0 11 4


23 0 11 0


23 2 11 0


23 0 11 0


Estonia 2006 178

Table Breakpoints used for antimicrobial susceptibility testing in Animals

Test Method Used

Disc diffusion

Agar dilution

Broth dilution

Etest


NCCLS

Escherichia coli,nonpathogenic

Standard forbreakpoint

Breakpoint concentration (microg/ ml) Range tested concentration(microg/ ml)

Disk content Breakpoint Zone diameter (mm)

Susceptible<=




AmphenicolsChloramphenicol SWARM2005 16 1 128

Florfenicol SWARM2005 16 4 32

TetracyclinesTetracyclin SWARM2005 8 0.5 64

FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin EUCAST 0.032 0.008 1

Enrofloxacin SWARM2005 0.12 0.03 4

QuinolonesNalidixic acid SWARM2005 16 1 128

Trimethoprim SWARM2005 2 0.25 32

SulfonamidesSulfonamide Sulfamethoxazol SWARM2005 256 16 2048

AminoglycosidesStreptomycin SWARM2005 32 2 256

Gentamicin SWARM2005 4 0.5 64

Neomycin Kanamycin EUCAST 8 2 16


CephalosporinsCefotaxim SWARM2005 0.25 0.06 2

Ceftiofur SWARM2005 1 0.12 16


PenicillinsAmpicillin SWARM2005 8 0.25 32

Footnote

Standard for cutoff values SWARM 2005 (Swedish Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring) Table AP3I. Cutof values mg/ L defininig resistance used for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria. Isolates with MIC higherthan the given values are considered resistant.


Estonia 2006 179

4. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC MICROBIOLOGICAL AGENTS


Estonia 2006 180

4.1. HISTAMINE


A. Histamine General evaluation


The situation is quite favorable. No positive samples were detetcted in 2006.


Estonia 2006 181

4.1.2. Histamine in foodstuffs

A. Histamine in foodstuffs

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Samples are taken in the frames of official control at retail and in the frames of import control.Sampling was performed by the officials of the Veterinary and Food Board and the HealthProtection Inspectorate.


Sampling distributed evenly throughout the year.


Other: fish, fishery products


Sampling is performed randomly, sample weight analysed is 5 g.


According to the Regulation 2073/ 2005.


HPLC


The batch should be removed from the market.


In 2006 no unsatisfactory samples has been detected.


Estonia 2006 182

Table Histamine in food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units in non conform

ity

<= 100 mg/ kg

>100 <=

200 mg/ kg

>200 <=

400 mg/ kg

> 400 mg/ kg

Fish

Fishery products from fishspecies associated with a highamount of histidine notenzyme maturated

VFB single 5 g 1 0

Fishery products which haveundergone enzyme maturationtreatment in brine

VFB single 5 g 3 0

Fishery products, unspecified


Footnote

All samples were taken in the frames of official control (official sampling)Surveillance official control, official sampling


Estonia 2006 183

4.2. ENTEROBACTER SAKAZAKII


A. Enterobacter sakazakii general evaluation


It is very early to make any conclusion, as only 2 samples were analyzed in 2006.


Estonia 2006 184

4.2.2. Enterobacter sakazakii in foodstuffs

A. Enterobacter sakazakii in foodstuffs

Monitoring system

Sampling strategy

Samples are taken by the Veterinary and Food Board officials. Samples are taken randomly atprocessing plant.


Sampling distributed evenly throughout the year.


Other: dried infant formulae


According to the Regulation 2073/ 2005 30 samples are taken from the batch and analyzedseparately. Sample weight analyzed is 10 g.


The sample was considered to be positive, if in any of 30 subsamples Enterobacter sakazakiiwas isolated.


Bacteriological method: ISO 22964.

Preventive measures in place

When possible, the batch is supposed for recycling.The batch should be removed from the market.


Only 2 samples were analyzed in the year 2006. One of them was positive for Enterobacter sakazakii.


Estonia 2006 185

Table Enterobacter sakazakii in food


Sampling unit

Sample weight

Units tested

Total units positive for Enterobacter sakazakii

Infant formula

dried at processing plant domestic production Surveillance officialcontrols (other than controland eradicationprogrammes) officialsampling (1)

VFB single 10 g 2 1

(1) : Each sample consisted of 30 subsamples, 1 subsample was positive.


Estonia 2006 186

4.3. STAPHYLOCOCCAL ENTEROTOXINS


A. Staphylococcal enterotoxins general evaluation


There were no samples detected in the year 2006 with the values of coagulasepositive staphylococci>100000 cfu/ g. Thus staphylococcal enterotoxins were not analyzed in the year 2006.


Estonia 2006 187

4.3.2. Staphylococcal enterotoxins in foodstuffs


Estonia 2006 188

5. FOODBORNE OUTBREAKS

Foodborne outbreaks are incidences of two or more human cases of the same disease or infection where thecases are linked or are probably linked to the same food source. Situation, in which the observed human casesexceed the expected number of cases and where a same food source is suspected, is also indicative of afoodborne outbreak.

A. Foodborne outbreaks

System in place for identification, epidemological investigations and reporting offoodborne outbreaks

Outbreak investigations, an important and challenging component of epidemiology and public health,can help to identify the source of ongoing outbreaks and prevent additional cases.Foodborne infections are registered in Estonia in the same way as infectious diseases (priority list).There is reporting system in place, where clinicians, mainly family physicians reporting cases offoodborne outbreaks to the local Public Health Service. The local Public Health Service is responsible for the investigation of foodborne disease outbreaks.Investigation procedures include epidemiological investigations, food sampling, diagnostic laboratoryassays.Under the regulation of Ministry of Social Affairs No 99 (in force since 15.06.2003) local offices ofthe HPI provide obligatory information to the Veterinary and Food local Services (VFB) about allcases of zoonoses diagnosed in humans (standard form).Obligatory reported zoonoses: Brucellosis,Echinococcosis,Campylobacter enteritis,Cryptosporodiosis,Leptospirosis,Rabies,Salmonellosis,Antrax,Trichinellosis,Tuberculosis (Mycobasterium bovis),Tularemia.The HPI and VFB share monitoring data on zoonoses at the local level on a monthly basis, but there isa daily/ immediate contact if needed and a system for dealing with outbreaks.

Description of the types of outbreaks covered by the reporting:

Definition of outbreaks:Outbreak an incident in which 2 or more persons experience a similar illness after ingestion of thesame food, or after ingestion of water from the same source, and where epidemiological evidenceimplicates the food or water as the source of the illness.Household outbreak an outbreak affecting 2 or more persons in the same private household notapparently connected with any other case or outbreak.

National evaluation of the reported outbreaks in the country:


Estonia 2006 189

Trends in numbers of outbreaks and numbers of human cases involved

Year / Number of foodborne outbreaks / Number of human cases involved2000 10 2242001 6 1052002 5 1272003 0 02004 7 252005 20 1152006 27 173In 20002003 only general outbreaks were reported (with 10 or more cases), since 2004 generaloutbreaks and family clusters with 2 or more cases are reported.

Evaluation of the severity and clinical picture of the human cases

Diarrhoeal diseases diarrhoea, abdominal pain, vomiting, fever, anorexia, dehydration may besever. Occasionally complications in different body systems.Tickborne encephalitis each laboratory confirmed case of encephalitis with typical clinicalpicture.

Descriptions of single outbreaks of special interest

One outbreak of salmonellosis (Salmonella enteritidis) was registered in the kindergarten inHarjumaa county on 29 March 2006. Number of affected persons 74. Suspected source ofinfection was omelet cooked in the kindergarten`s kitchen. Contributing factors werecontaminated raw product (eggs) and deficiencies in the food handling.

Control measures or other actions taken to improve the situation

Improvement of administrative supervision.Searching for food handling errors.Obligatory case report.Concurrent disinfection.Contact tracing and investigation of source of infection.Collaboration and information exchange between Health Protection Inspectorate and VeterinaryFood Board.

Suggestions to the community for the actions to be taken

Information of public via mass media about current situation and preventive measures.


Estonia 2006 190

Table Foodborne outbreaks in hum

ans

Causative agent

General

outbreak

Household

outbreak

Total Num

ber of

persons

Food im

plicated

Type of

evidence for

implication

of the food

Place where

food was

consum

ed

Contributing

factors

ill (in total)

died

in hospital

Food (sub)category

Suspected as a source

Confirmed as a source

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10

Cam

pylobacter C. jejuni

12

00

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling

Cam


12

02

pork

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling

Cam


12

02

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling

Cam

pylobacter Cam

pylobacter sp

p., unspecified

12

02

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling

Flavivirus tickborne encephalitis virus (TB

E)

12

01

raw goat m

ilkx

epidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


E)

12

02

raw goat m

ilkx

epidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


E)

14

04

raw goat m

ilkx

epidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


E)

15

05

raw goat m

ilkx

epidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling

Salmonella S. Enteritidis

12

00

chicken

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

00

salad with chicken

xepidem

iological

peivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

00

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

01

eggs

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

01

grill chicken

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

01

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

02

chicken

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

02

eggs

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


Estonia 2006 191


12

02

eggs

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

02

eggs

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


12

02

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


13

00

smoked chicken

xepidem

iological

private

household

deficiencies in

food handling


13

02

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


13

00

unknow

nkindergarten

deficiencies in

food handling


13

03

vegetable salad

xlaboratory

confirm

edcafe

deficiencies in

food handling


15

03

eggs, m

inced meat

xepidem

iological

airport in

Mauritania

deficiencies in

food handling


137

015

unknow

ncafe

deficiencies in

food handling


174

00

eggs (omelet)

xepidem

iological

kindergarten

deficiencies in

food handling

Salmonella S. Typhimurium

12

02

unknow

nprivate

household

deficiencies in

food handling


Estonia 2006 192

ESTONIAESTONIA The Report referred to in Article 9 of Directive 2003/ 99/ EC TRENDS AND SOURCES OF...

Documents

Transcript of ESTONIAESTONIA The Report referred to in Article 9 of Directive 2003/ 99/ EC TRENDS AND SOURCES OF...