Dose and cardiopulmonary effects of propofol alone or with midazolam for induction of anesthesia in critically ill dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the dose and cardiopulmonary effects of propofol alone or with midazolam for induction of anesthesia in American Society of Anesthesiologists status ≥III dogs requiring emergency abdominal surgery.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded, clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 19 client-owned dogs.MethodsDogs were sedated with fentanyl (2 μg kg^–1) intravenously (IV) for instrumentation for measurement of heart rate, arterial blood pressure, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance index, arterial blood gases, respiratory rate and rectal temperature. After additional IV fentanyl (3 μg kg^–1), the quality of sedation was scored and cardiopulmonary variables recorded. Induction of anesthesia was with IV propofol (1 mg kg^–1) and saline (0.06 mL kg^–1; group PS; nine dogs) or midazolam (0.3 mg kg^–1; group PM; 10 dogs), with additional propofol (0.25 mg kg^–1) IV every 6 seconds until endotracheal intubation. Induction/intubation quality was scored, and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. Variables were recorded for 5 minutes with the dog in lateral recumbency, breathing spontaneously, and then in dorsal recumbency with mechanical ventilation for the next 15 minutes. A general linear mixed model was used with post hoc analysis for multiple comparisons between groups (p < 0.05).ResultsThere were no differences in group demographics, temperature and cardiopulmonary variables between groups or within groups before or after induction. The propofol doses for induction of anesthesia were significantly different between groups, 1.9 ± 0.5 and 1.1 ± 0.5 mg kg^–1 for groups PS and PM, respectively, and the induction/intubation score was significantly better for group PM.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMidazolam co-induction reduced the propofol induction dose and improved the quality of induction in critically ill dogs without an improvement in cardiopulmonary variables, when compared with a higher dose of propofol alone.     

Anaesthetic and cardiorespiratory effects of a constant rate infusion of fentanyl in isoflurane‐anaesthetized sheep

ObjectiveTo determine the anaesthetic and cardiorespiratory effects of a constant rate infusion of fentanyl in sheep anaesthetized with isoflurane and undergoing orthopaedic surgery.Study designProspective, randomised, ‘blinded’ controlled study.AnimalsTwenty healthy sheep (weight mean 41.1 ± SD 4.5 kg).MethodsSheep were sedated with intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine (4 μg kg⁻¹) and morphine (0.2 mg kg⁻¹). Anaesthesia was induced with propofol (1 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ to effect IV) and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen and a continuous rate infusion (CRI) of fentanyl 10 μg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹ (group F) or saline (group P) for 100 minutes. The anaesthetic induction dose of propofol, isoflurane expiratory fraction (Fe’iso) required for maintenance and cardiorespiratory measurements were recorded and blood gases analyzed at predetermined intervals. The quality of recovery was assessed. Results were compared between groups using t-tests or Mann–Whitney as relevant.ResultsThe propofol induction dose was 4.7 ± 2.4 mg kg⁻¹. Fe’iso was significantly lower (by 22.6%) in group F sheep than group P (p = 0). Cardiac index (mean ± SD mL kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) was significantly (p = 0.012) lower in group F (90 ± 15) than group P (102 ± 35). Other measured cardiorespiratory parameters did not differ statistically significantly between groups. Recovery times and recovery quality were statistically similar in both groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceFentanyl reduced isoflurane requirements without clinically affecting the cardiorespiratory stability or post-operative recovery in anaesthetized sheep undergoing orthopaedic surgery.     

A comparison of cardiopulmonary function,recovery quality,and total dosages required for induction and total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus a propofol‐ketamine combination in healthy Beagle dogs

ObjectiveTo compare cardiopulmonary function, recovery quality, and total dosages required for induction and 60 minutes of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol (P) or a 1:1 mg mL⁻¹ combination of propofol and ketamine (KP).Study designRandomized crossover study.AnimalsTen female Beagles weighing 9.4 ± 1.8 kg.MethodsDogs were randomized for administration of P or KP in a 1:1 mg mL⁻¹ ratio for induction and maintenance of TIVA. Baseline temperature, pulse, respiratory rate (f_R), noninvasive mean blood pressure (MAP), and hemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO₂) were recorded. Dogs were intubated and spontaneously breathed room air. Heart rate (HR), f_R, MAP, SpO₂, end tidal carbon dioxide tension (Pe’CO₂), temperature, and salivation score were recorded every 5 minutes. Arterial blood gas analysis was performed at 10, 30, and 60 minutes, and after recovery. At 60 minutes the infusion was discontinued and total drug administered, time to extubation, and recovery score were recorded. The other treatment was performed 1 week later.ResultsKP required significantly less propofol for induction (4.0 ± 1.0 mg kg⁻¹ KP versus 5.3 ±1.1 mg kg⁻¹ P, p = 0.0285) and maintenance (0.3 ± 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ KP versus 0.6 ±0.1 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ P, p = 0.0018). Significantly higher HR occurred with KP. Both P and KP caused significantly lower MAP compared to baseline. MAP was significantly higher with KP at several time points. P had minimal effects on respiratory variables, while KP resulted in significant respiratory depression. There were no significant differences in salivation scores, time to extubation, or recovery scores.Conclusions and clinical relevanceTotal intravenous anesthesia in healthy dogs with ketamine and propofol in a 1:1 mg mL⁻¹ combination resulted in significant propofol dose reduction, higher HR, improved MAP, no difference in recovery quality, but more significant respiratory depression compared to propofol alone.     

Comparison of the effects of propofol or alfaxalone for anaesthesia induction and maintenance on respiration in cats

ObjectiveTo compare the effects of propofol and alfaxalone on respiration in cats.Study designRandomized, ‘blinded’, prospective clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy.MethodsAfter premedication with medetomidine 0.01 mg kg⁻¹ intramuscularly and meloxicam 0.3 mg kg⁻¹ subcutaneously, the cats were assigned randomly into two groups: group A (n = 10) were administered alfaxalone 5 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ followed by 10 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹ intravenously (IV) and group P (n = 10) were administered propofol 6 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ followed by 12 mg kg⁻¹hour⁻¹ IV for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia, respectively. After endotracheal intubation, the tube was connected to a non-rebreathing system delivering 100% oxygen. The anaesthetic maintenance drug rate was adjusted (± 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹) every 5 minutes according to a scoring sheet based on physiologic variables and clinical signs. If apnoea > 30 seconds, end-tidal carbon dioxide (Pe′CO₂) > 7.3 kPa (55 mmHg) or arterial haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO₂) < 90% occurred, manual ventilation was provided. Methadone was administered postoperatively. Data were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests, Fisher's exact test, linear mixed-effects models and binomial test.ResultsManual ventilation was required in two and eight of the cats in group A and P, respectively (p = 0.02). Two cats in both groups showed apnoea. Pe′CO₂ > 7.3 kPa was recorded in zero versus four and SpO₂ < 90% in zero versus six cats in groups A and P respectively. Induction and maintenance dose rates (mean ± SD) were 11.6 ± 0.3 mg kg⁻¹ and 10.7 ± 0.8 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹ for alfaxalone and 11.7 ± 2.7 mg kg⁻¹ and 12.4 ± 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹ for propofol.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone had less adverse influence on respiration than propofol in cats premedicated with medetomidine. Alfaxalone might be better than propofol for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia when artificial ventilation cannot be provided.     

Evaluation of alfaxalone and midazolam with or without flumazenil reversal in Egyptian fruit bats (Rousettus aegyptiacus)

ObjectivesTo evaluate alfaxalone–midazolam anesthesia in Egyptian fruit bats (Rousettus aegyptiacus) and the effect of flumazenil administration on recovery time and quality.Study designRandomized, blinded, crossover and controlled, experimental trial.AnimalsA total of 10 male Egyptian fruit bats.MethodsBats were anesthetized with alfaxalone (15 mg kg^?1) and midazolam (2 mg kg^?1) administered subcutaneously. During anesthesia, vital signs, muscle tone and reflexes were monitored every 10 minutes. Flumazenil (0.3 mg kg^?1) or saline at an equal volume was administered subcutaneously 60 minutes after anesthetic administration. Time to induction, time to first movement and recovery time (flying) were measured. Quality of induction, anesthesia and recovery were assessed on a 1–3 scale (1, poor; 2, good; 3, excellent).ResultsTime to induction was 4.2 ± 1.9 minutes (mean ± standard deviation), with median quality score of 2 (range, 1–3). Anesthesia quality score was 3 (1–3). During anesthesia, heart rate and respiratory frequency decreased significantly and penis relaxation, indicating muscle tone, increased significantly. Administration of flumazenil significantly reduced mean recovery time compared with saline (10 ± 5 versus 45 ± 17 minutes, respectively), and significantly improved the quality of recovery [2.5 (2–3) versus 1 (1–2), respectively].Conclusions and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone–midazolam anesthesia resulted in good induction, muscle relaxation and sufficient anesthesia to perform routine diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for approximately 40 minutes. Reversal of midazolam with flumazenil is recommended, resulting in quicker and better recovery.     

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.     

Continuous infusion of propofol or intermittent bolus of tiletamine‐zolazepam in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

ObjectiveTo investigate an infusion of propofol for anesthesia in comparison to tiletamine-zolazepam anesthesia, evaluating physiological variables and recovery in squirrel monkeys.Study designProspective non-blinded randomized study.AnimalsEight healthy squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus), aged 3 years and weighing 0.340–0.695 kg.MethodsPremedication was intramuscular midazolam (0.5 mg) and meperidine (4 mg). Anesthesia was induced with intravenous (IV) propofol (4 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) and maintained with propofol starting at 0.4 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 (PRO, n = 4) or IV tiletamine-zolazepam (5 mg kg^?1) and maintained with supplementary doses of TZ (TZ, n = 4). Cardiopulmonary variables were measured continuously. Arterial blood gases and lactate concentration were measured at the end of anesthesia. Quality and times of recovery were determined. Repeatedly measured data for significant differences were tested between groups with t-test and within groups by anova.ResultsMedian time for induction of anesthesia in PRO was 180 seconds. Mean maintenance infusion rate of propofol was 0.43 ± 0.05 mg kg^?1 minute^?1, varying during the 1 hour period. One monkey died after administration of TZ; others required 1, 4, or 8 supplemental doses. Cardiopulmonary variables were similar between groups, but hypotension was recorded. Recovery times to ventral recumbency in PRO (32 ± 17 minutes) and TZ (84 ± 11 minutes) and normal ambulation in PRO (58 ± 22 minutes) and TZ (358 ± 109minutes) were significantly different (p < 0.05). Recovery quality was superior in PRO, with less ataxia and fewer unsuccessful attempts to stand. Lactate concentration was not different between treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceCardiopulmonary variables were similar between protocols, aside from the higher incidence of hypotension in PRO, indicating that further studies with a larger number of animals are required. Compared to tiletamine-zolazepam, propofol anesthesia provided faster and superior anesthetic recovery in these animals.     

Cardiovascular and respiratory effects of two doses of fentanyl in the presence or absence of bradycardia in isoflurane-anesthetized dogs

Objective

To compare the cardiopulmonary effects of low and high doses of fentanyl before and after the correction of bradycardia in isoflurane-anesthetized dogs.

Total intravenous anesthesia with ketamine–medetomidine–propofol in horses

Propofol is a potentially useful intravenous anesthetic agent for total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in horses. The purpose of this study was to compare the anesthetic and cardiorespiratory effects of TIVA following the administration of propofol alone(P–TIVA) and ketamine–medetomidine–propofol (KM–P–TIVA) in adult horses. The carotid artery was translocated to a subcutaneous position during TIVA with P–TIVA (n = 6) or KM–P–TIVA (n = 6). All horses were premedicated with medetomidine [0.005 mg kg^–1, intravenously (IV)]. Anesthesia was induced with midazolam (0.04 mg kg^–1 IV) and ketamine (2.5 mg kg IV). All horses were orotracheally intubated and breathed 100% oxygen. The KM drug combination (ketamine 40 mg mL^–1 and medetomidine 0.05 mg mL^–1) was infused at a rate of 0.025 mL kg^–1 hour^–1. Subsequently, a loading dose of propofol (0.5 mg kg^–1, bolus IV) was administered to all horses; surgical anesthesia (determined by horse response to incision and surgical manipulation, positive response being purposeful or spontaneous movement of limbs or head) was maintained by varying the propofol infusion rate as needed. Arterial blood pressure and HR were also monitored. Both methods of producing TIVA provided excellent general anesthesia for the surgical procedure. Anesthesia time was 115 ± 17 (mean ± SD) and 112 ± 11 minutes in horses anesthetized with KM–P–TIVA and P–TIVA, respectively. The infusion rate of propofol required to maintain surgical anesthesia with KM–P–TIVA was significantly less than for P–TIVA (mean infusion rate of propofol during anesthesia; KM–P–TIVA 0.15 0.02 P–TIVA 0.23 ± 0.03 mg kg^–1 minute^–1, p = 0.004). Apnea occurred in all horses lasting 1–2 minutes and intermittent positive pressure ventilation was started. Cardiovascular function was maintained during both methods of producing TIVA. There were no differences in the time to standing after the cessation of anesthesia (KM–P–TIVA 62 ± 10 minutes versus P–TIVA 87 ± 36 minutes, p = 0.150). The quality of recovery was good in KM–P–TIVA and satisfactory in P–TIVA. KM–P–TIVA and P–TIVA produced clinically useful general anesthesia with minimum cardiovascular depression. Positive pressure ventilation was required to treat respiratory depression. Respiratory depression and apnea must be considered prior to the use of propofol in the horse.     

Propofol and fentanyl infusions in dogs of various breeds undergoing surgery

ObjectiveTo report the cardiovascular variables, anaesthetic effects and recovery quality of an anaesthesia technique using variable rate infusion propofol combined with constant rate infusion fentanyl in dogs undergoing elective surgery.Study designProspective clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 27 dogs, aged 2.7 ± 2.65 years and weighing 24 ± 11 kg.MethodsFollowing intramuscular acepromazine (0.03 or 0.05 mg kg^?1) and subcutaneous carprofen (4 mg kg^?1) pre-medication, anaesthesia was induced with propofol (4.0 ± 0.5 mg kg^?1) intravenously (IV). All dogs were ventilated with 100% oxygen to maintain normocapnia. Propofol was infused at 0.4 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 for 20 minutes and then at 0.3 mg kg^?1minute^?1. If mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) decreased below 70 mmHg, propofol infusion was reduced by 0.1 mg kg^?1 minute^?1. Five minutes after induction of anaesthesia, fentanyl was administered (2 μg kg^?1) IV followed by the infusion at 0.5 μg kg^?1 minute^?1 and atropine (40 μg kg^?1) IV. Heart rate, MAP, respiratory rate, tidal volume, end-tidal carbon dioxide, presence of reflexes, movements and recovery times and quality were recorded.ResultsMean anaesthetic duration was 131 ± 38.5 minutes. Mean heart rate peaked 10 minutes after atropine injection and gradually declined, reaching pre-anaesthetic values at 55 minutes. MAP easily was maintained above 70 mmHg. Mean times to return of spontaneous ventilation, extubation, head lift and sternal recumbency were 21 ± 10.1, 33 ± 14.6, 43 ± 19.7 and 65 ± 23.4 minutes, respectively. Recovery was smooth and quiet. The time to sternal recumbency was significantly correlated with the duration of anaesthesia and total dose of propofol; time to extubation was correlated to total dose of propofol.Conclusion and clinical relevancePropofol and fentanyl infusions provided stable cardiovascular function and satisfactory conditions for surgery. Some modifications of infusion rates are required to improve the long-recovery times.     

Cardiovascular,respiratory, electrolyte and acid–base balance during continuous dexmedetomidine infusion in anesthetized dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cardiovascular, respiratory, electrolyte and acid–base effects of a continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine during propofol–isoflurane anesthesia following premedication with dexmedetomidine.Study designProspective experimental study.AnimalsFive adult male Walker Hound dogs 1–2 years of age averaging 25.4 ± 3.6 kg.MethodsDogs were sedated with dexmedetomidine 10 μg kg^?1 IM, 78 ± 2.3 minutes (mean ± SD) before general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with propofol (2.5 ± 0.5 mg kg^?1) IV and maintained with 1.5% isoflurane. Thirty minutes later dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg kg^?1 IV was administered over 5 minutes followed by an infusion of 0.5 μg kg^?1 hour^?1. Cardiac output (CO), heart rate (HR), ECG, direct blood pressure, body temperature, respiratory parameters, acid–base and arterial blood gases and electrolytes were measured 30 and 60 minutes after the infusion started. Data were analyzed via multiple linear regression modeling of individual variables over time, compared to anesthetized baseline values. Data are presented as mean ± SD.ResultsNo statistical difference from baseline for any parameter was measured at any time point. Baseline CO, HR and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) before infusion were 3.11 ± 0.9 L minute^?1, 78 ± 18 beats minute^?1 and 96 ± 10 mmHg, respectively. During infusion CO, HR and MAP were 3.20 ± 0.83 L minute^?1, 78 ± 14 beats minute^?1 and 89 ± 16 mmHg, respectively. No differences were found in respiratory rates, PaO₂, PaCO₂, pH, base excess, bicarbonate, sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium or lactate measurements before or during infusion.Conclusions and clinical relevanceDexmedetomidine infusion using a loading dose of 0.5 μg kg^?1 IV followed by a constant rate infusion of 0.5 μg kg^?1 hour^?1 does not cause any significant changes beyond those associated with an IM premedication dose of 10 μg kg^?1, in propofol–isoflurane anesthetized dogs. IM dexmedetomidine given 108 ± 2 minutes before onset of infusion showed typical significant effects on cardiovascular parameters.     

Effect of different inspired fractions of oxygen on F-shunt and arterial partial pressure of oxygen in isoflurane-anaesthetized and mechanically ventilated Shetland ponies

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂) on intrapulmonary shunt fraction as measured by F-shunt in ponies during isoflurane anaesthesia.Study designProspective, randomized clinical study.AnimalsA group of 23 adult Shetland ponies undergoing a total of 32 anaesthetic procedures.MethodsPonies were premedicated intravenously (IV) with detomidine (0.01 mg kg^–1) and either morphine (0.1 mg kg^–1) or butorphanol (0.02 mg kg^–1). Anaesthesia was induced with ketamine (2.2 mg kg^–1) and midazolam (0.07 mg kg^–1) administered IV. Ponies were randomly allocated to maintenance of anaesthesia with isoflurane in oxygen (group TH; FiO₂ = 0.95) or a mixture of oxygen and medical air (group TL; FiO₂ = 0.65); all ponies were given a constant rate of infusion of detomidine. Animals were mechanically ventilated to maintain PaCO₂ between 40 and 50 mmHg. Arterial blood gas analysis was performed every 30 minutes. The F-shunt equation was calculated for each time point T0, T30, T60 and T90. Data were analysed using linear mixed model analysis and presented as mean ± standard deviation (p < 0.05).ResultsPaO₂ was greater in group TH than in group TL (TH: 406 ± 90, 438 ± 83, 441 ± 69 and 464 ± 53 mmHg versus TL: 202 ± 90, 186 ± 84, 172 ± 85 and 191 ± 98 mmHg at T0, T30, T60 and T90, respectively; p < 0.0001). In TH, F-shunt was < TL. Significant differences were found at T60 (TH: 13.2% ± 4.3 versus TL: 19.4% ± 8.3; p = 0.016) and T90 (TH: 11.7% ± 3.5 versus TL: 18.6% ± 9.5; p = 0.036).Conclusions and clinical relevanceOur findings do not support a beneficial effect of using a reduced FiO₂ to improve oxygenation in anaesthetized and mechanically ventilated Shetland ponies.     

Cardiopulmonary and isoflurane‐sparing effects of epidural or intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine in cats undergoing surgery with epidural lidocaine

ObjectiveTo compare the cardiorespiratory, anesthetic-sparing effects and quality of anesthetic recovery after epidural and constant rate intravenous (IV) infusion of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in cats given a low dose of epidural lidocaine under propofol-isoflurane anesthesia and submitted to elective ovariohysterectomy.Study designRandomized, blinded clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty-one adult female cats (mean body weight: 3.1 ± 0.4 kg).MethodsCats received DEX (4 μg kg^?1, IM). Fifteen minutes later, anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Cats were divided into three groups. In GI cats received epidural lidocaine (1 mg kg^?1, n = 7), in GII cats were given epidural lidocaine (1 mg kg^?1) + DEX (4 μg kg^?1, n = 7), and in GIII cats were given epidural lidocaine (1 mg kg^?1) + IV constant rate infusion (CRI) of DEX (0.25 μg kg^?1 minute^?1, n = 7). Variables evaluated included heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), systemic arterial pressures, rectal temperature (RT), end-tidal CO₂, end-tidal isoflurane concentration (e′ISO), arterial blood gases, and muscle tone. Anesthetic recovery was compared among groups by evaluation of times to recovery, HR, f_R, RT, and degree of analgesia. A paired t-test was used to evaluate pre-medication variables and blood gases within groups. anova was used to compare parametric data, whereas Friedman test was used to compare muscle relaxation.ResultsEpidural and CRI of DEX reduced HR during anesthesia maintenance. Mean ± SD e′ISO ranged from 0.86 ± 0.28% to 1.91 ± 0.63% in GI, from 0.70 ± 0.12% to 0.97 ± 0.20% in GII, and from 0.69 ± 0.12% to 1.17 ± 0.25% in GIII. Cats in GII and GIII had longer recovery periods than in GI.Conclusions and clinical relevanceEpidural and CRI of DEX significantly decreased isoflurane consumption and resulted in recovery of better quality and longer duration, despite bradycardia, without changes in systemic blood pressure.     

Inhibition and facilitation of nociceptively evoked muscular activity by fentanyl or dexmedetomidine in isoflurane-anaesthetized pigs

ObjectiveTo investigate motor and cardiovascular responses to dexmedetomidine or fentanyl in isoflurane-anaesthetized pigs.Study designExperimental, balanced, block randomized, two-group design.AnimalsA group of 16 crossbred pigs, 55 ± 8 days (mean ± standard deviation) old.MethodsDeltoid electromyography (EMG) was recorded during isoflurane anaesthesia. Electrical stimulation using 5, 10, 20 and 40 mA of the distal right thoracic limb elicited a nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR), quantified by the area under the curve (AUC) for the simulation intensity versus EMG amplitude response curve. Latency to movement evoked by clamping a claw for maximum 60 seconds was noted. Arterial blood pressure and pulse rate were recorded. Data were sampled at baseline and during dexmedetomidine 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 and 8.0 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 or fentanyl 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 and 160 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 infusions. The influence of infusion rate on NWR AUC and spontaneous EMG was analysed using a mixed model, with p < 5%.ResultsNWR AUC increased at fentanyl 5 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 but decreased at fentanyl 40, 80 and 160 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 and dexmedetomidine 4.0 and 8.0 μg kg^–1 hour^–1. All pigs at fentanyl 80 μg kg^–1 hour^–1, and three pigs at dexmedetomidine 8.0 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 had mechanical latencies greater than 60 seconds. Spontaneous EMG activity increased accompanied by visually evident ‘shivering’ at fentanyl 5, 10 and 20 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 but decreased at dexmedetomidine 2, 4 and 8 μg kg^–1 hour^–1. Clinically relevant effects of increasing infusion rates on blood pressure or pulse rate were not observed.Conclusion and clinical relevanceIf anaesthetic plane or antinociception is evaluated in pigs, response to claw clamping and NWR will not necessarily give uniform results when comparing drugs. If only one method is used, results should be interpreted cautiously.     

Comparison between continuous rate infusion and target-controlled infusion of propofol in dogs: a randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveTo compare a propofol continuous rate infusion (CRI) with a target-controlled infusion (TCI) in dogs.Study designRandomized prospective double-blinded clinical study.AnimalsA total of 38 healthy client-owned dogs.MethodsDogs premedicated intramuscularly with acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^–1) and an opioid (pethidine 3 mg kg^–1, morphine 0.2 mg kg^–1 or methadone 0.2 mg kg^–1) were allocated to P-CRI group (propofol 4 mg kg^–1 intravenously followed by CRI at 0.2 mg kg^–1 minute^–1), or P-TCI group [propofol predicted plasma concentration (Cp) of 3.5 μg mL^–1 for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia via TCI]. Plane of anaesthesia, heart rate, respiratory rate, invasive blood pressure, oxygen haemoglobin saturation, end-tidal carbon dioxide and body temperature were monitored by an anaesthetist blinded to the group. Numerical data were analysed by unpaired t test or Mann–Whitney U test, one-way analysis of variance and Dunnett’s post hoc test. Categorical data were analysed with Fisher’s exact test. Significance was set for p < 0.005.ResultsOverall, propofol induced a significant incidence of relative hypotension (mean arterial pressure 20% below baseline, 45%), apnoea (71%) and haemoglobin desaturation (65%) at induction of anaesthesia, with a higher incidence of hypotension and apnoea in the P-CRI than P-TCI group (68% versus 21%, p = 0.008; 84% versus 58%, p = 0.0151, respectively). Propofol Cp was significantly higher at intubation in the P-CRI than P-TCI group (4.83 versus 3.5 μg mL^–1, p < 0.0001), but decreased during infusion, while Cp remained steady in the P-TCI group. Total propofol administered was similar between groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceBoth techniques provided a smooth induction of anaesthesia but caused a high incidence of side effects. Titration of anaesthesia with TCI caused fewer fluctuations in Cp and lower risk of hypotension compared with CRI.     

Determining an optimum propofol infusion rate for induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs: a randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveTo determine an optimum infusion rate of propofol that permitted rapid tracheal intubation while minimizing the duration of postinduction apnoea.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 60 client-owned dogs presented for elective neutering and radiography.MethodsDogs were randomly allocated to one of five groups (groups A–E) to have propofol at an infusion rate of 0.5, 1, 2, 3, or 4 mg kg^–1 minute^–1, respectively, following intramuscular premedication with methadone 0.5 mg kg^–1 and dexmedetomidine 5 μg kg^–1. Propofol administration was stopped when adequate conditions for tracheal intubation were identified. Time to tracheal intubation and duration of apnoea were recorded. If oxygen haemoglobin saturation decreased to < 90%, manual ventilation was initiated. A one-way analysis of covariance was conducted to compare the effect of propofol infusion rate on duration of apnoea and intubation time whilst controlling for covariates, followed by post hoc tests. The significance level was set at p < 0.05.ResultsPropofol infusion rate had a significant effect on duration of apnoea (p = 0.004) and intubation time (p < 0.001) after controlling for bodyweight and sedation scores, respectively. The adjusted means (± standard error) of duration of apnoea were significantly shorter in groups A and B (49 ± 39 and 67 ± 37 seconds, respectively) than in groups C, D and E (207 ± 34, 192 ± 36 and 196 ± 34 seconds, respectively). Group B (115 ± 10 seconds) had a significantly shorter intubation time than group A (201 ± 10 seconds, p < 0.001).Conclusions and clinical relevanceAn infusion rate of 1.0 mg kg^–1 minute^–1 (group B) appears to offer the optimal compromise between speed of induction and duration of postinduction apnoea.     

Effect of anaesthetic maintenance with isoflurane or propofol on ease of endoscopic duodenal intubation in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the ease of endoscopic duodenal intubation (EDI) in dogs during maintenance of general anaesthesia with isoflurane or propofol infusion.Study designProspective, randomized, partially blinded clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 22 dogs undergoing upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy to include EDI were recruited.MethodsDogs were randomly assigned isoflurane (ISO; n = 10) or propofol (PROP; n = 11) for maintenance of general anaesthesia. Following anaesthetic premedication with intramuscular medetomidine (0.005 mg kg^–1) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^–1), general anaesthesia was induced with propofol, to effect, maintained with 1.5% (vaporizer setting) isoflurane in 100% oxygen or 0.2 mg kg^–1 minute^–1 propofol. The dose of both agents was adjusted to maintain general anaesthesia adequate for the procedure. Degree of sedation 20 minutes post-anaesthetic premedication, propofol induction dose, anaesthetist and endoscopist training grade, animal’s response to endoscopy, presence of gastro-oesophageal and duodenal-gastric reflux, spontaneous opening of the lower oesophageal and pyloric sphincters, antral movement and time to achieve EDI were recorded. EDI was scored 1 (immediate entry with minimal manoeuvring) to 4 (no entry after 120 seconds) by the endoscopist, blinded to the agent in use. Data were tested for normality (Shapiro-Wilk test) and differences between groups analysed using independent t test, Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test as appropriate.ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups for EDI score [median (interquartile range): 2 (3) ISO, 2 (3) PROP] or time to achieve EDI [mean ± standard deviation: 52.50 ± 107.00 seconds (ISO), 70.00 ± 196.00 seconds (PROP)]. Significantly more dogs responded to passage of the endoscope into the oesophagus in group PROP compared with group ISO (p = 0.01).Conclusions and clinical relevanceMaintenance of general anaesthesia with either isoflurane or propofol did not affect EDI score or time to achieve EDI.     

Minimum infusion rate and hemodynamic effects of propofol, propofol-lidocaine and propofol-lidocaine-ketamine in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of a constant rate infusion (CRI) of lidocaine alone or in combination with ketamine on the minimum infusion rate (MIR) of propofol in dogs and to compare the hemodynamic effects produced by propofol, propofol-lidocaine or propofol-lidocaine-ketamine anesthesia.Study designProspective, randomized cross-over experimental design.AnimalsFourteen adult mixed-breed dogs weighing 15.8 ± 3.5 kg.MethodsEight dogs were anesthetized on different occasions to determine the MIR of propofol alone and propofol in combination with lidocaine (loading dose [LD] 1.5 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.25 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) or lidocaine (LD 1.5 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.25 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) and ketamine (LD 1 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.1 mg kg^?1 minute^?1). In six other dogs, the hemodynamic effects and bispectral index (BIS) were investigated. Each animal received each treatment (propofol, propofol-lidocaine or propofol-lidocaine-ketamine) on the basis of the MIR of propofol determined in the first set of experiments.ResultsMean ± SD MIR of propofol was 0.51 ± 0.08 mg kg^?1 minute^?1. Lidocaine-ketamine significantly decreased the MIR of propofol to 0.31 ± 0.07 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 (37 ± 18% reduction), although lidocaine alone did not (0.42 ± 0.08 mg kg^?1 minute^?1, 18 ± 7% reduction). Hemodynamic effects were similar in all treatments. Compared with the conscious state, in all treatments, heart rate, cardiac index, mean arterial blood pressure, stroke index and oxygen delivery index decreased significantly, whereas systemic vascular resistance index increased. Stroke index was lower in dogs treated with propofol-lidocaine-ketamine at 30 minutes compared with propofol alone. The BIS was lower during anesthesia with propofol-lidocaine-ketamine compared to propofol alone.Conclusions and clinical relevanceLidocaine-ketamine, but not lidocaine alone, reduced the MIR of propofol in dogs. Neither lidocaine nor lidocaine in combination with ketamine attenuated cardiovascular depression produced by a continuous rate infusion of propofol.     

Heart rate,arterial pressure and propofol-sparing effects of guaifenesin in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the heart rate (HR) and systemic arterial pressure (sAP) effects, and propofol induction dose requirements in healthy dogs administered propofol with or without guaifenesin for the induction of anesthesia.Study designProspective blinded crossover experimental study.AnimalsA total of 10 healthy adult female Beagle dogs.MethodsDogs were premedicated with intravenous (IV) butorphanol (0.4 mg kg^–1) and administered guaifenesin 5% at 50 mg kg^–1 (treatment G50), 100 mg kg^–1 (treatment G100) or saline (treatment saline) IV prior to anesthetic induction with propofol. HR, invasive sAP and respiratory rate (f_R) were recorded after butorphanol administration, after guaifenesin administration and after propofol and endotracheal intubation. Propofol doses for intubation were recorded. Repeated measures analysis of variance (anova) was used to determine differences in propofol dose requirements among treatments, and differences in cardiopulmonary values over time and among treatments with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsPropofol doses (mean ± standard deviation) for treatments saline, G50 and G100 were 3.3 ± 1.0, 2.7 ± 0.7 and 2.1 ± 0.8 mg kg^–1, respectively. Propofol administered was significantly lower in treatment G100 than in treatment saline (p = 0.04). In treatments G50 and G100, HR increased following induction of anesthesia and intubation compared with baseline measurements. HR was higher in treatment G100 than in treatments G50 and saline following induction of anesthesia. In all treatments, sAP decreased following intubation compared with baseline values. There were no significant differences in sAP among treatments. f_R was lower following intubation than baseline and post co-induction values and did not differ significantly among treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceWhen administered as a co-induction agent in dogs, guaifenesin reduced propofol requirements for tracheal intubation. HR increased and sAP and f_R decreased, but mean values remained clinically acceptable.     

Dose requirement and cardiopulmonary effects of diluted and undiluted propofol for induction of anaesthesia in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the dose, cardiopulmonary effects and quality of anaesthetic induction in dogs using propofol (10 mg mL^–1) and diluted propofol (5 mg mL^–1).Study designRandomized, blinded, clinical study.AnimalsA total of 28 client-owned dogs (12 males/16 females).MethodsFollowing intramuscular acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^–1) and methadone (0.2 mg kg^–1), propofol (UP, 10 mg mL^–1) or diluted propofol (DP, 5 mg mL^–1) was administered intravenously (0.2 mL kg^–1 minute^–1) by an anaesthetist unaware of the allocated group to achieve tracheal intubation. Sedation, intubation and induction quality were scored from 0 to 3. Pre- and post-induction pulse rate (PR), respiratory rate (f_R) and systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial blood pressure were compared. Time to first breath and induction dose were recorded. Data were analysed for normality and Mann–Whitney U or Student t tests were performed where appropriate. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (range).ResultsThe propofol dose administered to achieve induction was lower in the DP group (2.62 ± 0.48 mg kg^–1) than in the UP group (3.48 ± 1.17 mg kg^–1) (p = 0.021). No difference was observed in pre- and post-induction PR, SAP, MAP, DAP and f_R between groups. The differences between post-induction and pre-induction values of these variables were also similar between groups. Time to first breath did not differ between groups. Sedation scores were similar between groups. Quality of tracheal intubation was marginally better with UP 0 (0–1) than with DP 1 (0–2) (p = 0.036), but overall quality of induction was similar between groups [UP 0 (0–1) and DP 0 (0–1), p = 0.549].Conclusion and clinical relevanceDiluting propofol reduced the dose to induce anaesthesia without significantly altering the cardiopulmonary variables.