Efficacy of maropitant in preventing vomiting in dogs premedicated with hydromorphone

ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of maropitant (Cerenia^®) in preventing vomiting after premedication with hydromorphone.Study designRandomized, blinded, prospective clinical study.AnimalsEighteen dogs ASA I/II admitted for elective orthopedic surgical procedures. The dogs were a mixed population of males and females, purebreds and mixed breeds, 1.0–10.2 years of age, weighing 3–49.5 kg.MethodsDogs were admitted to the study if they were greater than 1 year of age, healthy and scheduled to undergo elective orthopedic surgery. Dogs were randomly selected to receive one of two treatments administered by subcutaneous injection. Group M received 1.0 mg kg^?1 of maropitant, Group S received 0.1 mL kg^?1 of saline 1 hour prior to anesthesia premedication. Dogs were premedicated with 0.1 mg kg^?1 of hydromorphone intramuscularly. A blinded observer documented the presence of vomiting, retching and/or signs of nausea for 30 minutes after premedication.ResultsAll dogs in S vomited (6/9), retched (1/9) or displayed signs of nausea (2/9). None (0/9) of the dogs in M vomited, retched or displayed signs of nausea. Dogs in M had significantly fewer incidences of vomiting (p = 0.0090), vomiting and retching (p = 0.0023) and vomiting, retching and nausea (p < 0.0001) when compared to S.Conclusion and clinical relevanceMaropitant prevents vomiting, retching and nausea associated with intramuscular hydromorphone administration in dogs.     

Effects of a constant rate infusion of magnesium sulphate in healthy dogs anaesthetized with isoflurane and undergoing ovariohysterectomy

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of intravenous (IV) magnesium sulphate (MgSO₄) as a bolus followed by a constant rate infusion (CRI) on anaesthetic requirements, neuroendocrine stress response to surgery, haemostasis and postoperative analgesia in healthy dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designBlinded randomized clinical trial.AnimalsSixteen female dogs.MethodsAfter intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) and morphine (0.3 mg kg^?1), anaesthesia was induced with diazepam (0.2 mg kg^?1) and propofol (2 mg kg^?1) intravenously and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen in all dogs. Dogs were randomly assigned to two groups, M and C. Group M received MgSO₄ (50 mg kg^?1 over 15 minutes, followed by a 15 mg kg^?1 hour^?1 CRI). Group C received an equivalent bolus and CRI of lactated Ringer's solution. In addition, all dogs received lactated Ringer's solution (10 mL kg^?1 over 15 minutes followed by 10 mL kg^?1 hour^?1). End-tidal isoflurane and carbon dioxide tensions, cardio-respiratory variables, arterial blood gases, electrolytes, ACTH and cortisol concentrations were measured at different time points. Thromboelastography (TEG) was performed pre- and post-anaesthesia. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the short form of the Glasgow Composite Pain Scale. Data were analysed with repeated measures anova and Mann–Whitney U tests (p< 0.05).ResultsNo statistically significant differences between groups were found in any of the measured variables. However, the alpha angle and maximal amplitude recorded by TEG in group M were significantly increased post-anaesthesia, but remained within the reference interval. One dog in Group M and two in Group C received rescue analgesia during recovery.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAs used in this study, MgSO₄ failed to decrease isoflurane requirements, postoperative pain and stress hormone concentrations; however, it did not produce any cardio-respiratory or major haemostatic side effects. Administration of intravenous MgSO₄ together with an opioid during ovariohysterectomy in dogs does not seem to provide any clinical advantage.     

Effect of epidural and intravenous use of the neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonist maropitant on the sevoflurane minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) in dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of maropitant, an NK-1 receptor antagonist on the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane after intravenous and epidural administration to dogs.Study designProspective experimental study.AnimalsSeven, adult, spayed-female dogs (24.8 ± 1.9 kg).MethodsEach dog was anesthetized twice with sevoflurane in oxygen, with at least 10 days separating the anesthetic events. The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane was determined using the tail-clamp technique. During the first anesthetic event, the MAC of sevoflurane was determined initially and again after intravenous administration of maropitant (5 mg kg^?1) and an infusion (150 μg kg^?1 hour^?1). During the second anesthetic event, an epidural catheter was advanced to the 4th lumbar vertebra and MAC was determined after administration of saline and maropitant (1 mg kg^?1) epidurally. All MAC determinations were done in duplicate. The MAC values were adjusted to sea level and compared using student's t-test.ResultsThe baseline MAC for sevoflurane was 2.08 ± 0.25%. Intravenous maropitant decreased (p < 0.05) MAC by 16% (1.74 ± 0.17%). In contrast, epidural administration of either saline or maropitant did not change (p > 0.05) the MAC (2.17 ± 0.34% and 1.92 ± 0.12%, respectively).Conclusion and clinical relevanceMaropitant decreased the MAC of sevoflurane when administered intravenously to dogs but not after epidural administration.     

The effect of body condition on propofol requirement in dogs

ObjectiveTo determine if body condition score (BCS) influences the sedative effect of intramuscular (IM) premedication or the dose of intravenous (IV) propofol required to achieve endotracheal intubation in dogs.Study designProspective clinical study.AnimalsForty–six client–owned dogs undergoing general anaesthesia.MethodsDogs were allocated to groups according to their BCS (BCS, 1 [emaciated] to 9 [obese]): Normal–weight Group (NG, n = 25) if BCS 4–5 or Over–weight Group (OG, n = 21) if BCS over 6. Dogs were scored for sedation prior to IM injection of medetomidine (5 μg kg^?1) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^?1) and twenty minutes later anaesthesia was induced by a slow infusion of propofol at 1.5 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 until endotracheal intubation could be achieved. The total dose of propofol administered was recorded. Data were tested for normality then analyzed using Student t–tests, Mann–Whitney U tests, chi–square tests or linear regression as appropriate.ResultsMean ( ± SD) propofol requirement in NG was 2.24 ± 0.53 mg kg^?1 and in OG was 1.83 ± 0.36 mg kg^?1. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (p = 0.005). The degree of sedation was not different between the groups (p = 0.7). Post–induction apnoea occurred in 11 of 25 animals in the NG and three of 21 in OG (p = 0.052).ConclusionsOverweight dogs required a lower IV propofol dose per kg of total body mass to allow tracheal intubation than did normal body condition score animals suggesting that IV anaesthetic doses should be calculated according to lean body mass. The lower dose per kg of total body mass may have resulted in less post–induction apnoea in overweight/obese dogs. The effect of IM premedication was not significantly affected by the BCS.Clinical relevanceInduction of general anaesthesia with propofol in overweight dogs may be expected at lower doses than normal–weight animals.     

Effects of pre‐operative administration of medetomidine on plasma insulin and glucose concentrations in healthy dogs and dogs with insulinoma

ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of medetomidine on plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in dogs with insulinoma and in healthy dogs undergoing anesthesia and surgery.AnimalsTwenty–five dogs with insulinoma and 26 healthy dogs.MethodsIn dogs with insulinoma, medetomidine (5 μg kg^?1) was randomly included (n = 12) or omitted (n = 13) from the pre–anesthetic medication protocol, which typically contained an opioid and an anticholinergic. Healthy dogs received medetomidine (5 μg kg^?1; n = 13) or acepromazine (0.04 mg kg^?1; n = 13) plus an opioid (morphine 0.5 mg kg^?1) and an anticholinergic (atropine 0.04 mg kg^?1) as pre–anesthetic medications. Pre–anesthetic medications were given intramuscularly. Plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were measured before (sample 1) and 30 minutes after pre–anesthetic medication (sample 2), and at the end of surgery in dogs with insulinoma or at 2 hours of anesthesia in healthy dogs (sample 3). Glucose requirement to maintain intra–operative normoglycemia in dogs with insulinoma was quantified and compared. Data were analyzed with anova and Bonferroni post–test, t–tests or chi–square tests as appropriate with p < 0.05 considered significant. Data are shown as mean ± SD.ResultsMedetomidine significantly decreased plasma insulin concentrations and increased plasma glucose concentrations in healthy dogs and those with insulinoma. These variables did not change significantly in the dogs not receiving medetomidine. In the dogs with insulinoma, intra–operative glucose administration rate was significantly less in the animals that received medetomidine compared to those that did not.ConclusionsPre–anesthetic administration of medetomidine significantly suppressed insulin secretion and increased plasma glucose concentration in dogs with insulinoma and in healthy dogs undergoing anesthesia and surgery.Clinical relevanceThese findings support the judicious use of medetomidine at low doses as an adjunct to the anesthetic management of dogs with insulinoma.     

An evaluation of anaesthetic induction in healthy dogs using rapid intravenous injection of propofol or alfaxalone

ObjectiveTo evaluate quality of anaesthetic induction and cardiorespiratory effects following rapid intravenous (IV) injection of propofol or alfaxalone.Study designProspective, randomised, blinded clinical study.AnimalsSixty healthy dogs (ASA I/II) anaesthetized for elective surgery or diagnostic procedures.MethodsPremedication was intramuscular acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^?1) and meperidine (pethidine) (3 mg kg^?1). For anaesthetic induction dogs received either 3 mg kg^?1 propofol (Group P) or 1.5 mg kg^?1 alfaxalone (Group A) by rapid IV injection. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R) and oscillometric arterial pressures were recorded prior to induction, at endotracheal intubation and at 3 and 5 minutes post-intubation. The occurrence of post-induction apnoea or hypotension was recorded. Pre-induction sedation and aspects of induction quality were scored using 4 point scales. Data were analysed using Chi-squared tests, two sample t-tests and general linear model mixed effect anova (p < 0.05).ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups with respect to sex, age, body weight, f_R, post-induction apnoea, arterial pressures, hypotension, SpO₂, sedation score or quality of induction scores. Groups behaved differently over time with respect to HR. On induction HR decreased in Group P (?2 ± 28 beats minute^?1) but increased in Group A (14 ± 33 beats minute^?1) the difference being significant (p = 0.047). However HR change following premedication also differed between groups (p = 0.006). Arterial pressures decreased significantly over time in both groups and transient hypotension occurred in eight dogs (five in Group P, three in Group A). Post-induction apnoea occurred in 31 dogs (17 in Group P, 14 in Group A). Additional drug was required to achieve endotracheal intubation in two dogs.Conclusions and Clinical relevanceRapid IV injection of propofol or alfaxalone provided suitable conditions for endotracheal intubation in healthy dogs but post-induction apnoea was observed commonly.     

The sedative effects of low-dose medetomidine and butorphanol alone and in combination intravenously in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the sedative effects of intravenous (IV) medetomidine (1 μg kg^?1) and butorphanol (0.1 mg kg^?1) alone and in combination in dogs.Study designProspective, blinded, randomized clinical trial.AnimalsSixty healthy (American Society of Anesthesiologists I) dogs, aged 6.2 ± 3.2 years and body mass 26 ± 12.5 kg.MethodsDogs were assigned to four groups: Group S (sodium chloride 0.9% IV), Group B (butorphanol IV), Group M (medetomidine IV) and Group MB (medetomidine and butorphanol IV). The same clinician assessed sedation before and 12 minutes after administration using a numerical scoring system in which 19 represented maximum sedation. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate, pulse quality, capillary refill time and rectal temperature were recorded after each sedation score assessment. Sedation scores, sedation score difference (score after minus score before administration) and patient variables were compared using one-way anova for normally distributed variables and Kruskal–Wallis test for variables with skewed distributions and/or unequal variances. Where significance was found, further evaluation used Bonferroni multiple comparisons for pair-wise testing.ResultsBreed, sex, neuter status, age and body mass did not differ between groups. Sedation scores before substance administration were similar between groups (p = 0.2). Sedation scores after sedation were significantly higher in Group MB (mean 9.5 ± SD 5.5) than in group S (2.5 ± 1.8) (p < 0.001), group M (3.1 ± 2.5) (p < 0.001) and group B (3.7 ± 2.0) (p = 0.003). Sedation score difference was significantly higher in Group MB [7 (0–13)] than in Group S [0 (?1 to 4)] (p < 0.001) and Group M [0 (0–6)] (p < 0.001). HR decreased significantly in Groups M and MB compared with Group S (p < 0.05).Conclusion and clinical relevanceLow-dose medetomidine 1 μg kg^?1 IV combined with butorphanol 0.1 mg kg^?1 IV produced more sedation than medetomidine or butorphanol alone. HR was significantly decreased in both medetomidine groups.     

The effect of maropitant on intraoperative isoflurane requirements and postoperative nausea and vomiting in dogs: a randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveTo establish if preoperative maropitant significantly reduced intraoperative isoflurane requirements and reduced clinical signs associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in dogs.Study designRandomized clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty-four healthy, client-owned dogs undergoing routine ovariohysterectomy.MethodsPremedication involved acepromazine (0.03 mg kg⁻¹) combined with methadone (0.3 mg kg⁻¹) intramuscularly 45 minutes before anaesthetic induction with intravenous (IV) propofol, dosed to effect. Meloxicam (0.2 mg kg⁻¹) was administered intravenously. Dogs were randomly assigned to administration of saline (group S; 0.1 mL kg⁻¹, n = 12) or maropitant (group M; 1 mg kg⁻¹, n = 12) subcutaneously at time of premedication. Methadone (0.1 mg kg⁻¹ IV) was repeated 4 hours later. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen, dosed to effect by an observer unaware of group allocation. The dogs were assessed hourly, starting 1 hour postoperatively, using the short form of the Glasgow Composite Pain Score (GCPS), and for ptyalism and signs attributable to PONV [score from 0 (none) to 3 (severe)] by blinded observers. Owners completed a questionnaire at the postoperative recheck.ResultsOverall mean ± standard deviation end-tidal isoflurane percentage was lower in group M (1.19 ± 0.26%) than group S (1.44 ± 0.23%) (p = 0.022), but was not significantly different between groups at specific noxious events (skin incision, ovarian pedicle clamp application, cervical clamp application, wound closure). Cardiorespiratory variables and postoperative GCPS were not significantly different between groups. Overall, 50% of dogs displayed signs attributable to PONV, with no difference in PONV scores between groups (p = 0.198). No difference in anaesthetic recovery was noted by owners between groups.ConclusionsMaropitant reduced overall intraoperative isoflurane requirements but did not affect the incidence of PONV.Clinical relevanceMaropitant provided no significant benefits to dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy with this anaesthetic and analgesic protocol, although clinically significant reductions in isoflurane requirements were noted.     

Sedative and analgesic effects of buprenorphine,combined with either acepromazine or dexmedetomidine,for premedication prior to elective surgery in cats and dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the sedative and analgesic effects of intramuscular buprenorphine with either dexmedetomidine or acepromazine, administered as premedication to cats and dogs undergoing elective surgery.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded clinical study.AnimalsForty dogs and 48 cats.MethodsAnimals were assigned to one of four groups, according to anaesthetic premedication and induction agent: buprenorphine 20 μg kg^?1 with either dexmedetomidine (dex) 250 μg m^?2 or acepromazine (acp) 0.03 mg kg^?1, followed by alfaxalone (ALF) or propofol (PRO). Meloxicam was administered preoperatively to all animals and anaesthesia was always maintained using isoflurane. Physiological measures and assessments of pain, sedation and mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT) were made before and after premedication, intraoperatively, and for up to 24 hours after premedication. Data were analyzed with one-way, two-way and mixed between-within subjects anova, Kruskall–Wallis analyses and Chi squared tests. Results were deemed significant if p ≤ 0.05, except where multiple comparisons were performed (p ≤ 0.005).ResultsCats premedicated with dex were more sedated than cats premedicated with acp (p < 0.001) and ALF doses were lower in dex cats (1.2 ± 1.0 mg kg^?1) than acp cats (2.5 ± 1.9 mg kg^?1) (p = 0.041). There were no differences in sedation in dogs however PRO doses were lower in dex dogs (1.5 ± 0.8 mg kg^?1) compared to acp dogs (3.3 ± 1.1 mg kg^?1) (p < 0.001). There were no differences between groups with respect to pain scores or MNT for cats or dogs.ConclusionChoice of dex or acp, when given with buprenorphine, caused minor, clinically detectable, differences in various characteristics of anaesthesia, but not in the level of analgesia.Clinical relevanceA combination of buprenorphine with either acp or dex, followed by either PRO or ALF, and then isoflurane, accompanied by an NSAID, was suitable for anaesthesia in dogs and cats undergoing elective surgery. Choice of sedative agent may influence dose of anaesthetic induction agent.     

Alfaxalone for total intravenous anaesthesia in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy: a comparison of premedication with acepromazine or dexmedetomidine

ObjectiveTo describe alfaxalone total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) following premedication with buprenorphine and either acepromazine (ACP) or dexmedetomidine (DEX) in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designProspective, randomised, clinical study.AnimalsThirty-eight healthy female dogs.MethodsFollowing intramuscular buprenorphine (20 μg kg^?1) and acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) or dexmedetomidine (approximately 10 μg kg^?1, adjusted for body surface area), anaesthesia was induced and maintained with intravenous alfaxalone. Oxygen was administered via a suitable anaesthetic circuit. Alfaxalone infusion rate (initially 0.07 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) was adjusted to maintain adequate anaesthetic depth based on clinical assessment. Alfaxalone boluses were given if required. Ventilation was assisted if necessary. Alfaxalone dose and physiologic parameters were recorded every 5 minutes. Depth of sedation after premedication, induction quality and recovery duration and quality were scored. A Student's t-test, Mann–Whitney U and Chi-squared tests determined the significance of differences between groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD or median (range). Significance was defined as p < 0.05.ResultsThere were no differences between groups in demographics; induction quality; induction (1.5 ± 0.57 mg kg^?1) and total bolus doses [1.2 (0 – 6.3) mg kg^?1] of alfaxalone; anaesthesia duration (131 ± 18 minutes); or time to extubation [16.6 (3–50) minutes]. DEX dogs were more sedated than ACP dogs. Alfaxalone infusion rate was significantly lower in DEX [0.08 (0.06–0.19) mg kg^?1 minute^?1] than ACP dogs [0.11 (0.07–0.33) mg kg^?1 minute^?1]. Cardiovascular variables increased significantly during ovarian and cervical ligation and wound closure compared to baseline values in both groups. Apnoea and hypoventilation were common and not significantly different between groups. Arterial haemoglobin oxygen saturation remained above 95% in all animals. Recovery quality scores were significantly poorer for DEX than for ACP dogs.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone TIVA is an effective anaesthetic for surgical procedures but, in the protocol of this study, causes respiratory depression at infusion rates required for surgery.     

Effects of altering the sequence of midazolam and propofol during co‐induction of anaesthesia

ObjectiveTo assess the effects of varying the sequence of midazolam and propofol administration on the quality of induction, cardiorespiratory parameters and propofol requirements in dogs.Study designRandomized, controlled, clinical study.AnimalsThirty‐three client owned dogs (ASA I‐III, 0.5–10 years, 5–30 kg).MethodsDogs were premedicated with acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^?1) and morphine (0.4 mg kg^?1) intramuscularly. After 30 minutes, group midazolam‐propofol (MP) received midazolam (0.25 mg kg^?1) intravenously (IV) before propofol (1 mg kg^?1) IV, group propofol‐midazolam (PM) received propofol before midazolam IV at the same doses, and control group (CP) received saline IV, instead of midazolam, before propofol. Supplementary boluses of propofol (0.5 mg kg^?1) were administered to effect to all groups until orotracheal intubation was completed. Behaviour after midazolam administration, quality of sedation and induction, and ease of intubation were scored. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate, and systolic arterial blood pressure were recorded before premedication, post‐premedication, after midazolam or saline administration, and at 0, 2, 5, and 10 minutes post‐intubation. End‐tidal CO₂ and arterial oxygen haemoglobin saturation were recorded at 2, 5 and 10 minutes post‐intubation.ResultsQuality of sedation and induction, and ease of intubation were similar in all groups. Incidence of excitement was higher in the MP compared to CP (p = 0.014) and PM (p = 0.026) groups. Propofol requirements were decreased in MP and PM groups with respect to CP (p < 0.001), and in PM compared to MP (p = 0.022). The HR decreased after premedication in all groups, and increased after midazolam and subsequent times in MP (p = 0.019) and PM (p = 0.001) groups. Incidence of apnoea and paddling was higher in CP (p = 0.005) and MP (p = 0.031) groups than in PM.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAdministration of midazolam before propofol reduced propofol requirements although caused mild excitement in some dogs. Administration of propofol before midazolam resulted in less excitatory phenomena and greater reduction of propofol requirements.     

Assessment of cardiac troponin I and C-reactive protein concentrations associated with anesthetic protocols using sevoflurane or a combination of fentanyl, midazolam, and sevoflurane in dogs

ObjectiveTo report serum cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations in dogs anesthetized for elective surgery using two anesthetic protocols.Study designProspective, randomized clinical study.AnimalsTwenty client-owned dogs presenting for elective ovariohysterectomy or castration.MethodsThe dogs were randomized into two groups. All dogs were premedicated with glycopyrrolate (0.011 mg kg^?1) and hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^?1) IM approximately 30 minutes prior to induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia in dogs in group 1 was induced with propofol (6 mg kg^?1) IV to effect and in dogs in group 2 with diazepam (0.2 mg kg^?1) IV followed by etomidate (2 mg kg^?1) IV to effect. For maintenance of anesthesia, group 1 received sevoflurane (adjustable vaporizer setting 0.5–4%) and group 2 received a combination of fentanyl (0.8 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) and midazolam (8.0 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) IV plus sevoflurane (adjustable vaporizer setting 0.5–4%) to maintain anesthesia. Serum cTnI and CRP concentrations were measured at baseline and 6, 18, and 24 hours post-anesthetic induction. Biochemical analysis was performed at baseline. Lactate was obtained at baseline and 6 hours post-anesthetic induction. Heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were measured intra-operatively.ResultsBaseline serum cTnI and CRP concentrations were comparable between groups. A significant difference in serum cTnI or CRP concentrations was not detected post-operatively between groups at any time point. Serum CRP concentrations were significantly increased post-anesthetic induction in both groups, which was attributed to surgical trauma.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThere was no significant difference in serum cTnI and CRP concentrations between anesthetic protocols. Further investigation in a larger number of dogs is necessary to confirm the current findings.     

Post-operative analgesic effects of butorphanol or firocoxib administered to dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy

ObjectiveTo compare the post-operative analgesic effects of butorphanol or firocoxib in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded, clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty-five dogs >1 year of age.MethodsDogs received acepromazine intramuscularly (IM), 0.05 mg kg^?1 and either butorphanol IM, 0.2 mg kg^?1 (BG, n = 12) or firocoxib orally (PO), 5 mg kg^?1 (FG, n = 13), approximately 30 minutes before induction of anesthesia with propofol. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. Ovariohysterectomy was performed by the same surgeon. Pain scores using the dynamic and interactive visual analog scale (DIVAS) were performed before and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 20 hours after the end of surgery by one observer, blinded to the treatment. Rescue analgesia was provided with morphine (0.5 mg kg^?1) IM and firocoxib, 5 mg kg^?1 (BG only) PO if DIVAS > 50. Groups were compared using paired t-tests and Fisher’s exact test (p < 0.05). Data are presented as mean ± SD.ResultsThe BG required significantly less propofol (BG: 2.6 ± 0.59 mg kg^?1; FG: 5.39 ± 0.7 mg kg^?1) (p < 0.05) but the anesthesia time was longer (BG: 14 ± 6, FG: 10 ± 4 minutes). There were no differences for body weight (BG: 7.9 ± 5.0, FG: 11.5 ± 4.6 kg), sedation scores, and surgery and extubation times (BG: 10 ± 2, 8 ± 5 minutes; FG: 9 ± 3, 8 ± 4 minutes, respectively) (p > 0.05). The FG had significantly lower pain scores than the BG at 1, 2 and 3 hours following surgery (p < 0.05). Rescue analgesia was administered to 11/12 (92%) and 2/13 (15%) dogs in the BG and FG, respectively (p < 0.05).Conclusion and clinical relevanceFirocoxib produced better post-operative analgesia than butorphanol. Firocoxib may be used as part of a multimodal analgesia protocol but may not be effective as a sole analgesic.     

Evaluation of nalbuphine,butorphanol and morphine in dogs during ovariohysterectomy and on early postoperative pain

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of nalbuphine, butorphanol and morphine combined with acepromazine on intraoperative and early postoperative pain management in dogs anesthetized for ovariohysterectomy.Study designProspective, randomized blinded clinical study.AnimalsA total of 48 healthy female dogs of different breeds, aged 1–6 years, weighing (mean ± standard deviation) 14.5 ± 4.8 kg.MethodsDogs were randomly assigned into four groups to be intravenously administered nalbuphine (0.5 mg kg^–1; group N0.5), nalbuphine (1.0 mg kg^–1; group N1.0), butorphanol (0.4 mg kg^–1; group B0.4) or morphine (0.2 mg kg^–1; group M0.2) combined with acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^–1) prior to propofol and isoflurane for anesthesia. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate, systolic arterial pressure and rectal temperature (RT) were recorded at time points during anesthesia. A dynamic interactive visual analog scale applied in three phases (DIVAS I, II and III) and the modified Glasgow composite measure pain scale were used to assess pain before premedication and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 hours after extubation. Administration of rescue analgesia was recorded.ResultsAt the left ovarian pedicle ligation, HR was higher in N1.0 than in B0.4 (p = 0.020). RT decreased significantly by the end of surgery in N0.5 (p = 0.043) and B0.4 (p = 0.010). Rescue analgesia was administered postoperatively over 6 hours to eight, seven, nine and 10 dogs in N0.5, N1.0, B0.4 and M0.2, respectively (p = 0.57). DIVAS II was higher in B0.4 than in N1.0 at 2 and 3 hours (p = 0.038 and p = 0.002, respectively) and N0.5 at 3 hours (p = 0.003).Conclusions and clinical relevanceAt the doses used, all premedication protocols provided insufficient intraoperative analgesia, with minimal clinical differences between groups. No premedication provided satisfactory analgesia in the first 6 hours postoperatively.     

Effects of vatinoxan in dogs premedicated with medetomidine and butorphanol followed by sevoflurane anaesthesia: a randomized clinical study

ObjectiveTo investigate effects of vatinoxan in dogs, when administered as intravenous (IV) premedication with medetomidine and butorphanol before anaesthesia for surgical castration.Study designA randomized, controlled, blinded, clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 28 client-owned dogs.MethodsDogs were premedicated with medetomidine (0.125 mg m^?2) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^?1) (group MB; n = 14), or medetomidine (0.25 mg m^?2), butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^?1) and vatinoxan (5 mg m^?2) (group MB-VATI; n = 14). Anaesthesia was induced 15 minutes later with propofol and maintained with sevoflurane in oxygen (targeting 1.3%). Before surgical incision, lidocaine (2 mg kg^?1) was injected intratesticularly. At the end of the procedure, meloxicam (0.2 mg kg^?1) was administered IV. The level of sedation, the qualities of induction, intubation and recovery, and Glasgow Composite Pain Scale short form (GCPS-SF) were assessed. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), mean arterial pressure (MAP), end-tidal concentration of sevoflurane (Fe′Sevo) and carbon dioxide (Pe′CO₂) were recorded. Blood samples were collected at 10 and 30 minutes after premedication for plasma medetomidine and butorphanol concentrations.ResultsAt the beginning of surgery, HR was 61 ± 16 and 93 ± 23 beats minute^?1 (p = 0.001), and MAP was 78 ± 7 and 56 ± 7 mmHg (p = 0.001) in MB and MB-VATI groups, respectively. No differences were detected in f_R, Pe′CO₂, Fe′Sevo, the level of sedation, the qualities of induction, intubation and recovery, or in GCPS-SF. Plasma medetomidine concentrations were higher in group MB-VATI than in MB at 10 minutes (p = 0.002) and 30 minutes (p = 0.0001). Plasma butorphanol concentrations were not different between groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIn group MB, HR was significantly lower than in group MB-VATI. Hypotension detected in group MB-VATI during sevoflurane anaesthesia was clinically the most significant difference between groups.     

S‐ketamine versus racemic ketamine in dogs: their relative potency as induction agents

ObjectiveTo determine the potency ratio between S-ketamine and racemic ketamine as inductive agents for achieving tracheal intubation in dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, ‘blinded’, clinical trial conducted in two consecutive phases.Animals112 client-owned dogs (ASA I or II).MethodsAll animals were premedicated with intramuscular acepromazine (0.02 mg kg⁻¹) and methadone (0.2 mg kg⁻¹). In phase 1, midazolam (0.2 mg kg⁻¹) with either 3 mg kg⁻¹ of racemic ketamine (group K) or 1.5 mg kg⁻¹ of S-ketamine (group S) was administered IV, for induction of anaesthesia and intubation. Up to two additional doses of racemic (1.5 mg kg⁻¹) or S-ketamine (0.75 mg kg⁻¹) were administered if required. In phase 2, midazolam (0.2 mg kg⁻¹) with 1 mg kg⁻¹ of either racemic ketamine (group K) or S-ketamine (group S) was injected and followed by a continuous infusion (1 mg kg minute⁻¹) of each respective drug. Differences between groups were statistically analyzed via t-test, Fisher exact test and ANOVA for repeated measures.ResultsDemographics and quality and duration of premedication, induction and intubation were comparable among groups. During phase 1 it was possible to achieve tracheal intubation after a single dose in more dogs in group K (n = 25) than in group S (n = 16) (p = 0.046). A dose of 3 mg kg⁻¹ S-ketamine allowed tracheal intubation in the same number of dogs as 4.5 mg kg⁻¹ of racemic ketamine. The estimated potency ratio was 1.5:1. During phase 2, the total dose (mean ± SD) of S-ketamine (4.02 ±1.56 mg kg⁻¹) and racemic ketamine (4.01 ± 1.42) required for tracheal intubation was similar.Conclusion and clinical relevanceRacemic and S-ketamine provide a similar quality of anaesthetic induction and intubation. S-ketamine is not twice as potent as racemic ketamine and, if infused, the potency ratio is 1:1.     

Cardiovascular effects of epidural administration of methadone, ropivacaine 0.75% and their combination in isoflurane anaesthetized dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the cardiovascular effects of four epidural treatments in isoflurane anaesthetised dogs.Study designProspective, randomized. experimental study.AnimalsSix female, neutered Beagle dogs (13.3 ± 1.0 kg), aged 3.6 ± 0.1 years.MethodsAnaesthesia was induced with propofol (8.3 ± 1.1 mg kg^?1) and maintained with isoflurane in a mixture of oxygen and air [inspiratory fraction of oxygen (FiO₂) = 40%], using intermittent positive pressure ventilation. Using a cross-over model, NaCl 0.9% (P); methadone 1% 0.1 mg kg^?1 (M); ropivacaine 0.75% 1.65 mg kg^?1 (R) or methadone 1% 0.1 mg kg^?1 + ropivacaine 0.75% 1.65 mg kg^?1 (RM) in equal volumes (0.23 mL kg^?1) using NaCl 0.9%, was administered epidurally at the level of the lumbosacral space. Treatment P was administered to five dogs only. Cardiovascular and respiratory variables, blood gases, and oesophageal temperature were recorded at T-15 and for 60 minutes after epidural injection (T0).ResultsMean overall heart rate (HR in beats minute^?1) was significantly lower after treatment M (119 ± 16) (p = 0.0019), R (110 ± 18) (p < 0.0001) and RM (109 ± 13) (p < 0.0001), compared to treatment P (135 ± 21). Additionally, a significant difference in HR between treatments RM and M was found (p = 0.04). After both ropivacaine treatments, systemic arterial pressures (sAP) were significantly lower compared to other treatments. No significant overall differences between treatments were present for central venous pressure, cardiac output, stroke volume, systemic vascular resistance, oxygen delivery and arterial oxygen content (CaO₂). Heart rate and sAP significantly increased after treatment P and M compared to baseline (T-15). With all treatments significant reductions from baseline were observed in oesophageal temperature, packed cell volume and CaO₂. A transient unilateral Horner’s syndrome occurred in one dog after treatment R.Conclusions and clinical relevanceClinically important low sAPs were observed after the ropivacaine epidural treatments in isoflurane anaesthetised dogs. Systemic arterial pressures were clinically acceptable when using epidural methadone.     

Effect of maropitant,a neurokinin‐1 receptor antagonist,on the minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane during stimulation of the ovarian ligament in cats

ObjectiveDetermine if maropitant decreases the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane during stimulation of the ovarian ligament in cats.Study designProspective study.AnimalsFifteen, female cats weighing 2.5 ± 0.6kg (mean ± SD).MethodsAnesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane. The right ovary was accessed via laparoscopy. A suture around the ovary and ovarian ligament was exteriorized through the abdominal wall for stimulation. A stimulus–response curve was created to identify the optimal force for MAC comparisons. In 10 cats, MAC was determined with only sevoflurane (baseline) then after 1 and 5 mg kg^?1 intravenous maropitant administration. The stimulation tension force used was 4.9 N. Repeated measures anova was used to compare the groups. MAC was defined as the average of the cross‐over concentrations and reported MAC is adjusted to sea‐level and depicted as mean ± SD.ResultsThe stimulus‐response curve was hyperbolic and plateaued at 4.3 ± 3 N. The optimal tension force chosen to compare MAC was 4.9 N. The baseline sevoflurane MAC was 2.96 ± 0.3%. Maropitant, 1 mg kg^?1, decreased the MAC to 2.51 ± 0.3% (15%, p < 0.01). The higher maropitant dose of 5 mg kg^?1 did not change MAC further when compared to the low dose (2.46 ± 0.4%, p = 0.33).Conclusion and clinical relevanceThe ovarian ligament stimulation model is suitable to determine MAC during visceral stimulation in cats. Maropitant decreased the anesthetic requirements during visceral ovarian and ovarian ligament stimulation in cats. Maropitant (1 mg kg^?1) decreases MAC by 15%; a higher dose had no additional effect.     

Antinociceptive and selected physiological effects of morphine and xylazine on tiletamine‐zolazepam anesthesia in llamas

ObjectiveEvaluate antinociception, anesthesia, and recovery in llamas given tiletamine-zolazepam (TZ) with either morphine, xylazine, morphine and xylazine, or saline.Study designRandomized crossover experimental study.AnimalsSix healthy, adult intact male llamas.MethodsLlamas were given each of four treatments intramuscularly with a 1-week washout: TZ (2 mg kg^?1) combined with either morphine (0.5 mg kg^?1; M), xylazine (0.15 mg kg^?1; X), morphine (0.5 mg kg^?1) and xylazine (0.15mg kg^?1) (MX), or saline (C). Llamas breathed room air during the experiment. Characteristics of anesthesia, recovery, and selected cardiopulmonary variables were recorded. Antinociception was assessed by clamping a claw at 5-minute intervals. Data were analyzed using a mixed-model anova and Tukey-Kramer test, and are expressed as least squares mean ± SEM. Significance was set at p < 0.05.ResultsNo llama in the control group demonstrated antinociception. Antinociception was longest with treatment MX, followed by treatments X and M, respectively. Heart rates in llamas given treatments X and MX were significantly lower than with other treatments. The respiratory rate in llamas given treatment C was greater (p < 0.05) than for all other treatments, however, the respiratory rate was not significantly different among treatments X, M and MX. The PaO₂ for llamas given MX remained <60 mmHg throughout the 20 minute period of blood gas analysis. Mean arterial blood pressure in llamas in treatment MX was less than for treatments M or C.Conclusion and clinical relevanceThe combination of morphine (0.5 mg kg^?1) and xylazine (0.15 mg kg^?1) increased the duration of antinociception compared with xylazine alone, in TZ-anesthetized llamas. Treatments X, M and MX were associated with hypoxemia (PaO₂ < 60 mmHg).     

Characterisation of tramadol,morphine and tapentadol in an acute pain model in Beagle dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the analgesic potential of the centrally acting analgesics tramadol, morphine and the novel analgesic tapentadol in a pre-clinical research model of acute nociceptive pain, the tail-flick model in dogs.Study designProspective part-randomized pre-clinical research trial.AnimalsFifteen male Beagle dogs (HsdCpb:DOBE), aged 12–15 months.MethodsOn different occasions separated by at least 1 week, dogs received intravenous (IV) administrations of tramadol (6.81, 10.0 mg kg^?1), tapentadol (2.15, 4.64, 6.81 mg kg^?1) or morphine (0.464, 0.681, 1.0 mg kg^?1) with subsequent measurement of tail withdrawal latencies from a thermal stimulus (for each treatment n = 5). Blood samples were collected immediately after the pharmacodynamic measurements of tramadol to determine pharmacokinetics and the active metabolite O-demethyltramadol (M1).ResultsTapentadol and morphine induced dose-dependent antinociception with ED50-values of 4.3 mg kg^?1 and 0.71 mg kg^?1, respectively. In contrast, tramadol did not induce antinociception at any dose tested. Measurements of the serum levels of tramadol and the M1 metabolite revealed only marginal amounts of the M1 metabolite, which explains the absence of the antinociptive effect of tramadol in this experimental pain model in dogs.Conclusions and clinical relevanceDifferent breeds of dogs might not or only poorly respond to treatment with tramadol due to low metabolism of the drug. Tapentadol and morphine which act directly on μ-opioid receptors without the need for metabolic activation are demonstrated to induce potent antinociception in the experimental model used and should also provide a reliable pain management in the clinical situation. The non-opioid mechanisms of tramadol do not provide antinociception in this experimental setting. This contrasts to many clinical situations described in the literature, where tramadol appears to provide useful analgesia in dogs for post-operative pain relief and in more chronically pain states.