Assessment of the effects of intramuscular administration of alfaxalone with and without medetomidine in Horsfield's tortoises (Agrionemys horsfieldii)

ObjectiveTo characterise four different intramuscular (IM) anaesthetic protocols, two with alfaxalone and two with alfaxalone in combination with medetomidine in terrestrial tortoises.Study designBlinded, randomized, cross‐over experimental study.AnimalsNine healthy adult male Horsfield's tortoises (Agrionemys horsfieldii).MethodsEach tortoise was randomly assigned to one of four different protocols: 1) 10 mg kg^?1 alfaxalone; 2) 10 mg kg^?1 alfaxalone + 0.10 mg kg^?1 medetomidine; 3) 20 mg kg^?1 alfaxalone; and 4) 20 mg kg^?1 alfaxalone + 0.05 mg kg^?1 medetomidine. During the experiment, the following variables were recorded: heart rate; respiratory rate; peripheral nociceptive responses; muscle strength; ability to intubate; palpebral, corneal and tap reflexes; and cloacal temperature.ResultsProtocols 1 and 2 resulted in moderate sedation with no analgesia, and moderate to deep sedation with minimal analgesia, respectively. Protocols 3 and 4 resulted in deep sedation or anaesthesia with variable analgesic effect; these two protocols had the longest total anaesthetic time and allowed intubation in 6/9 and 8/9 tortoises respectively. The total anaesthesia/sedation time produced by alfaxalone was significantly increased (p <0.05) by the addition of medetomidine. There were no significant differences regarding time to plateau phase and duration of plateau phase. Baseline heart rate of 53 ± 6 beats minute^?1 decreased significantly (p <0.05) with all protocols, and was lower (p <0.05) in protocols 3 and 4. Heart rate increased after atipamezole administration, but the increase was transient. In two tortoises, extreme bradycardia with no cardiac activity for 10 minutes was observed with protocols 3 and 4.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone 10 and 20 mg kg^?1 IM can be used for sedation for non‐painful procedures. Alfaxalone in combination with medetomidine can be used for deeper sedation or anaesthesia, but the observed respiratory and cardiovascular depression may limit its use.     

Effects of different doses of dexmedetomidine on anaesthetic induction with alfaxalone – a clinical trial

ObjectiveTo document the effects of two doses of dexmedetomidine on the induction characteristics and dose requirements of alfaxalone.Study designRandomized controlled clinical trial.AnimalsSixty one client owned dogs, status ASA I-II.MethodsDogs were allocated randomly into three groups, receiving as pre-anaesthetic medication, no dexmedetomidine (D₀), 1 μg kg^?1 dexmedetomidine (D₁) intramuscularly (IM) or 3 μg kg^?1 dexmedetomidine IM (D₃). All dogs also received 0.2 mg kg^?1 methadone IM. Level of sedation was assessed prior to induction of anaesthesia. Induction of general anaesthesia was performed with alfaxalone administered intravenously to effect at a rate of 1 mg kg^?1 minute^?1; the required dose to achieve tracheal intubation was recorded. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. Cardiopulmonary parameters were recorded throughout the anaesthetic period. Quality of intubation, induction and recovery of anaesthesia were recorded. Quantitative data were compared with one-way anova or Kruskal-Wallis test. Repeated measures were log-transformed and analysed with repeated measures anova (p < 0.05).ResultsTreatment groups were similar for categorical data, with exception of sedation level (p < 0.001). The doses (mean ± SD) of alfaxalone required for intubation were D₀ 1.68 ± 0.24, D₁ 1.60 ± 0.36 and D₃ 1.41 ± 0.43, the difference between D₀ and D₃ being statistically significant (p = 0.036). Heart and respiratory rates during the anaesthetic period were significantly different over time and between groups (p < 0.001); systolic arterial blood pressure was significantly different over time (p < 0.001) but not between groups (p = 0.833). Induction quality and recovery scores were similar between groups (p = 1.000 and p = 0.414, respectively).Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe administration of alfaxalone resulted in a good quality anaesthetic induction which was not affected by the dose of dexmedetomidine. Dexmedetomidine at 3 μg kg^?1 IM combined with methadone provides good sedation and enables a reduction of alfaxalone requirements.     

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.     

Minimum infusion rate of alfaxalone for total intravenous anaesthesia after sedation with acepromazine or medetomidine in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy

ObjectiveTo determine the induction doses, then minimum infusion rates of alfaxalone for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA), and subsequent, cardiopulmonary effects, recovery characteristics and alfaxalone plasma concentrations in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy after premedication with butorphanol-acepromazine or butorphanol-medetomidine.Study designProspective randomized blinded clinical study.AnimalsTwenty-eight healthy cats.MethodsCats undergoing ovariohysterectomy were assigned into two groups: together with butorphanol [0.2 mg kg^?1 intramuscularly (IM)], group AA (n = 14) received acepromazine (0.1 mg kg^?1 IM) and group MA (n = 14) medetomidine (20 μg kg^?1 IM). Anaesthesia was induced with alfaxalone to effect [0.2 mg kg^?1 intravenously (IV) every 20 seconds], initially maintained with 8 mg kg^?1 hour^?1 alfaxalone IV and infusion adjusted (±0.5 mg kg^?1 hour^?1) every five minutes according to alterations in heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), Doppler blood pressure (DBP) and presence of palpebral reflex. Additional alfaxalone boli were administered IV if cats moved/swallowed (0.5 mg kg^?1) or if f_R >40 breaths minute^?1 (0.25 mg kg^?1). Venous blood samples were obtained to determine plasma alfaxalone concentrations. Meloxicam (0.2 mg kg^?1 IV) was administered postoperatively. Data were analysed using linear mixed models, Chi-squared, Fishers exact and t-tests.ResultsAlfaxalone anaesthesia induction dose (mean ± SD), was lower in group MA (1.87 ± 0.5; group AA: 2.57 ± 0.41 mg kg^?1). No cats became apnoeic. Intraoperative bolus requirements and TIVA rates (group AA: 11.62 ± 1.37, group MA: 10.76 ± 0.96 mg kg^?1 hour^?1) did not differ significantly between groups. Plasma concentrations ranged between 0.69 and 10.76 μg mL^?1. In group MA, f_R, end-tidal carbon dioxide, temperature and DBP were significantly higher and HR lower.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone TIVA in cats after medetomidine or acepromazine sedation provided suitable anaesthesia with no need for ventilatory support. After these premedications, the authors recommend initial alfaxalone TIVA rates of 10 mg kg^?1 hour^?1.     

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.     

The utility of a novel formulation of alfaxalone in a remote delivery system

ObjectiveTo quantify induction time, reliability, physiological effects, recovery quality and dart volume of a novel formulation of alfaxalone (40 mg mL^?1) used in combination with medetomidine and azaperone for the capture and handling of wild bighorn sheep.Study designProspective clinical study.AnimalsA total of 23 wild bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) in Sheep River Provincial Park, AB, Canada.MethodsFree-ranging bighorn sheep were immobilized using medetomidine, azaperone and alfaxalone delivered with a remote delivery system. Arterial blood was collected for measurement of blood gases, physiologic variables (temperature, heart and respiratory rates) were recorded and induction and recovery length and quality were scored.ResultsData from 20 animals were included. Administered dose rates were alfaxalone (0.99 ± 0.20 mg kg^?1; 40 mg mL^?1), azaperone (0.2 ± 0.04 mg kg^?1; 10 mg mL^?1) and medetomidine (0.16 ± 0.03 mg kg^?1; 30 mg mL^?1). The mean drug volume injected was 1.51 mL. The median (range) induction time was 7.7 (5.8–9.7) minutes, and recovery was qualitatively smooth.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAn increased concentration formulation of alfaxalone was administered in combination with medetomidine and azaperone, and resulted in appropriate anesthesia for the capture and handling of bighorn sheep. The dart volume was small, with potential for reducing capture-related morbidity.     

Effects of intravenous acepromazine and butorphanol on propofol dosage for induction of anesthesia in healthy Beagle dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of intravenous (IV) premedication with acepromazine, butorphanol or their combination, on the propofol anesthetic induction dosage in dogs.Study designProspective, blinded, Latin square design.AnimalsA total of three male and three female, healthy Beagle dogs, aged 3.79 ± 0.02 years, weighing 10.6 ± 1.1 kg, mean ± standard deviation.MethodsEach dog was assigned to one of six IV treatments weekly: 0.9% saline (treatment SAL), low-dose acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^–1; treatment LDA), high-dose acepromazine (0.04 mg kg^–1; treatment HDA), low-dose butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^–1; treatment LDB), high-dose butorphanol (0.4 mg kg^–1; treatment HDB); and a combination of acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^–1) with butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^–1; treatment ABC). Physiologic variables and sedation scores were collected at baseline and 10 minutes after premedication. Then propofol was administered at 1 mg kg^–1 IV over 15 seconds, followed by boluses (0.5 mg kg^–1 over 5 seconds) every 15 seconds until intubation. Propofol dose, physiologic variables, recovery time, recovery score and adverse effects were monitored and recorded. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects anova (p < 0.05).ResultsPropofol dosage was lower in all treatments than in treatment SAL (4.4 ± 0.5 mg kg^–1); the largest decrease was recorded in treatment ABC (1.7 ± 0.3 mg kg^–1). Post induction mean arterial pressures (MAPs) were lower than baseline values of treatments LDA, HDA and ABC. Apnea and hypotension (MAP < 60 mmHg) developed in some dogs in all treatments with the greatest incidence of hypotension in treatment ABC (4/6 dogs).Conclusions and clinical relevanceAlthough the largest decrease in propofol dosage required for intubation was after IV premedication with acepromazine and butorphanol, hypotension and apnea still occurred.     

Clinical efficacy and cardiorespiratory effects of alfaxalone, or diazepam/fentanyl for induction of anaesthesia in dogs that are a poor anaesthetic risk

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy and cardiorespiratory effects of alfaxalone as an anaesthetic induction agent in dogs with moderate to severe systemic disease.Study designRandomized prospective clinical study.AnimalsForty dogs of physical status ASA III-V referred for various surgical procedures.MethodsDogs were pre-medicated with intramuscular methadone (0.2 mg kg^?1) and allocated randomly to one of two treatment groups for induction of anaesthesia: alfaxalone (ALF) 1–2 mg kg^?1 administered intravenously (IV) over 60 seconds or fentanyl 5 μg kg^?1 with diazepam 0.2 mg kg^?1± propofol 1–2 mg kg^?1 (FDP) IV to allow endotracheal intubation. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen and fentanyl infusion following both treatments. All dogs were mechanically ventilated to maintain normocapnia. Systolic blood pressure (SAP) was measured by Doppler ultrasound before and immediately after anaesthetic induction, but before isoflurane administration. Parameters recorded every 5 minutes throughout subsequent anaesthesia were heart and respiratory rates, end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide and isoflurane, oxygen saturation of haemoglobin and invasive systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure. Quality of anaesthetic induction and recovery were recorded. Continuous variables were assessed for normality and analyzed with the Mann Whitney U test. Repeated measures were log transformed and analyzed with repeated measures anova (p < 0.05).ResultsTreatment groups were similar for continuous and categorical data. Anaesthetic induction quality was good following both treatments. Pre-induction and post-induction systolic blood pressure did not differ between treatments and there was no significant change after induction. The parameters measured throughout the subsequent anaesthetic procedures did not differ between treatments. Quality of recovery was very, quite or moderately smooth.Conclusions and clinical relevanceInduction of anaesthesia with alfaxalone resulted in similar cardiorespiratory effects when compared to the fentanyl-diazepam-propofol combination and is a clinically acceptable induction agent in sick dogs.     

The use of alfaxalone for premedication,induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in pigs: a pilot study

Objective

The evaluation of alfaxalone as a premedication agent and intravenous anaesthetic in pigs.

Alfaxalone anaesthesia in Lemur catta following dexmedetomidine–butorphanol–midazolam sedation

Objective

To evaluate the clinical effects and quality of sedation, induction, maintenance and recovery in Lemur catta after dexmedetomidine–butorphanol–midazolam sedation and alfaxalone anaesthesia.

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.     

Cardiac troponin I concentrations following medetomidine‐butorphanol sedation in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of medetomidine–butorphanol sedation on serum cardiac troponin I (cTnI) concentration, a marker of myocardial ischemia and injury, in healthy dogs undergoing pre–surgical radiographs for orthopedic procedures.Study designProspective clinical study.AnimalsTwenty client–owned dogs with no history of cardiac disease.MethodsDogs were evaluated for pre–existing cardiac disease with electrocardiogram (ECG), noninvasive blood pressure and echocardiogram. Sedation was achieved using a combination of medetomidine (10 μg kg^?1) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^?1) intravenously. Blood pressure, heart rate and ECG were serially recorded throughout the duration of sedation. Serum cTnI concentration was measured at baseline and 6, 18, and 24–hours post–sedation.ResultsFollowing administration of medetomidine and butorphanol, all dogs were adequately sedated for radiographs and had a decreased heart rate and increased diastolic blood pressure. Arrhythmias associated with increased parasympathetic tone occurred, including a sinus arrhythmia further characterized as a sinus bigeminy in 17 of the dogs. Serum cTnI was undetectable at all time points in all but three dogs. Two of the three dogs had a detectable concentration of cTnI at all time points measured, including prior to sedation. Only one of the two dogs had a cTnI concentration above the normal reference interval. The dogs that exhibited detectable cTnI had no significant difference in signalment, heart rate, blood pressure, or lactate concentration as compared to those with undetectable cTnI.Conclusions and clinical relevanceSedation with medetomidine and butorphanol had predictable cardiovascular effects including bradycardia, an increase in arterial blood pressure, and arrhythmias in apparently healthy dogs requiring radiographs for orthopedic injuries, but did not induce significant increases in serum cTnI concentration following the drug doses used in this study.     

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.     

Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs

Objectives

To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA).

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.