Comparative study of the efficacy of Aivlosin® WSG versus Pulmotil® AC and Draxxin® 25 in the control of Swine Respiratory Disease (SRD)

Lechtenberg, K.F.1, Lopez, A2, Berge, A.C.3, Mora, J.2, Hintz, A. 4

1 Midwest Veterinary Services, Nebraska, U.S.; 2 ECO Animal Health, Ltd., London, United Kingdom; 3 Berge Veterinary Consulting, Vollezele, Belgium; 4 Pharmgate Animal Health, Wilmington, North Carolina, U.S.


The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Aivlosin® 62.5% Water Soluble Granules (WSG), Pulmotil® AC and Draxxin® 25 for the control of SRD in 216 naturally infected pigs.


Material and Methods

On Day 0, when approximately 5% of pigs showed clinical signs of SRD, pigs were randomly allocated to Aivlosin®, Pulmotil®, Draxxin® or untreated Control groups. Each group consisted of 54 pigs housed in 9 pens. The Aivlosin® and Pulmotil® pigs received medicated water for 5 consecutive days (D1-D5) at inclusion rates of 50 ppm tylvalosin and 200 ppm tilmicosin, respectively. The Draxxin® pigs received a single injection of Draxxin® at 2.5 mg/kg bodyweight (D1). The Control and Draxxin® pigs received unmedicated water throughout the study.

Clinical observations were performed daily from D0-D5. The primary variables for efficacy comparison were pen clinical score (sum of respiratory and depression scores on a scale of 0 (normal) to 3 (severe)) and mortality. Average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion rate (FCR) were secondary variables and analysed with general linear models controlling for bodyweight (including pigs that died) on D0. Clinical score data was analysed with a cumulative logistic regression model of pig nested within pen, and accounting for the D0 scores.


All three treatments significantly reduced the clinical scores compared to the Control group (Table 1).  Aivlosin® was not significantly different to Draxxin® for clinical scores (OR=1.20;P=0.54). The odds of a higher clinical score were significantly higher in Pulmotil® compared to Draxxin® (OR=2.26;P<0.01) and Aivlosin® (OR=0.53;P=0.03) groups. Mortality was numerically lowest in the Aivlosin® group (Table 1).


Table 1: Summary of Analysis of Clinical Score Data (Frequency) (D0-D5) and Mortality















P-diff*   Mortality (%)
Aivlosin® 136 38 70 13 13 0 0 c 0
Pulmotil® 114 44 71 18 13 0 1 b 7
Draxxin® 161 40 50 12 7 0 0 c 2
Control 59 56 75 33 43 1 a 7

*P values generated from regression model; different letter shows significant difference (P<0.05)

The Draxxin® group had significantly higher ADG than the other groups; FCR was significantly lower in the Aivlosin® than the Pulmotil® and Control groups (Table 2).


Table 2: ADG and FCR (Pounds) D0-D6

Aivlosin® Pulmotil® Draxxin® Control
ADG 0.50b 0.50b 0.65a 0.47b
FCR 1.03b 1.08ab 0.96b 1.26a



The Aivlosin® group had significantly better SRD clinical scores during the treatment period than Pulmotil® or Control groups and no significant difference to the Draxxin® group. Mortality was lowest in the Aivlosin® group. FCR was significantly lower in the Aivlosin® compared to the Pulmotil® and Control groups.

®Aivlosin is a registered trademark of ECO Animal Health Ltd., London, United Kingdom

®Draxxin is a registered trademark of Zoetis Inc., U.S.A.

®Pulmotil is a registered trademark of Elanco Inc., U.S.A.