A review of the off-label use of selamectin (Stronghold®/Revolution®) in dogs and cats

Since its introduction approximately seven years ago, selamectin (Stronghold®/Revolution®, Pfizer Inc.) has been used off-label to treat a number of ecto- and endoparasite conditions in dogs and cats. It has been used as a successful prophylactic against Dirofilaria repens and as a treatment for Aelurostrongylus abstrusus in cats. It has also been used to treat notoedric mange, infestation with the nasal mite Pneumonyssoides caninum, Cheyletiella spp. and Neotrombicula autumnalis infestations and larval Cordylobia anthropophaga infection. However, to date attempts to treat generalised canine demodicosis have not been successful. In all cases, treatment was apparently well tolerated by the host

Treatment of rabbit cheyletiellosis with selamectin or ivermectin: a retrospective case study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A retrospective study of rabbits treated against cheyletiellosis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of selamectin or ivermectin in clinical practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Medical records from 53 rabbits with microscopically confirmed <it>Cheyletiella </it>infestation were collected from two small animal clinics. The rabbits were divided into three groups, based on treatment protocols. Group 1 included 11 rabbits treated with ivermectin injections at 200–476 μg kg^-1subcutaneously 2–3 times, with a mean interval of 11 days. In Group 2, 27 rabbits were treated with a combination of subcutaneous ivermectin injections (range 618–2185 μgkg^-1) and oral ivermectin (range 616–2732 μgkg^-1) administered by the owners, 3–6 times at 10 days interval. The last group (Group 3) included 15 rabbits treated with selamectin spot-on applications of 6.2–20,0 mgkg^-1, 1–3 times with an interval of 2–4 weeks. Follow-up time was 4 months–4.5 years.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Rabbits in remission were 9/11 (81,8%), 14/27 (51,9%) and 12/15 (80,8%) in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>All treatment protocols seemed to be sufficiently effective and safe for practice use. Though very high doses were used in Group 2 (ivermectin injections followed by oral administration), the protocol seemed less efficacious compared to ivermectin injections (Group 1) and selamectin spot on (Group 3), respectively, although not statistically significant. Controlled prospective studies including larger groups are needed to further evaluate efficacy of the treatment protocols.</p