Effect of intravenous propofol and remifentanil on heart rate, blood pressure and nociceptive response in acepromazine premedicated dogs

ObjectiveTo investigate the cardiorespiratory, nociceptive and endocrine effects of the combination of propofol and remifentanil, in dogs sedated with acepromazine.Study designProspective randomized, blinded, cross-over experimental trial.AnimalsTwelve healthy adult female cross-breed dogs, mean weight 18.4 ± 2.3 kg.MethodsDogs were sedated with intravenous (IV) acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) followed by induction of anesthesia with IV propofol (5 mg kg^?1). Anesthesia was maintained with IV propofol (0.2 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) and remifentanil, infused as follows: R1, 0.125 μg kg^?1 minute^?1; R2, 0.25 μg kg^?1 minute^?1; and R3, 0.5 μg kg^?1 minute^?1. The same dogs were administered each dose of remifentanil at 1-week intervals. Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (f_R), end tidal CO₂ (Pe′CO₂), arterial hemoglobin O₂ saturation, blood gases, and rectal temperature were measured before induction, and 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, and 120 minutes after beginning the infusion. Nociceptive response was investigated by electrical stimulus (50 V, 5 Hz and 10 ms). Blood samples were collected for plasma cortisol measurements. Statistical analysis was performed by anova (p < 0.05).ResultsIn all treatments, HR decreased during anesthesia with increasing doses of remifentanil, and increased significantly immediately after the end of infusion. MAP remained stable during anesthesia (72–98 mmHg). Antinociception was proportional to the remifentanil infusion dose, and was considered satisfactory only with R2 and R3. Plasma cortisol concentration decreased during anesthesia in all treatments. Recovery was smooth and fast in all dogs.Conclusions and clinical relevanceInfusion of 0.25–0.5 μg kg^?1 minute^?1 remifentanil combined with 0.2 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 propofol produced little effect on arterial blood pressure and led to a good recovery. The analgesia produced was sufficient to control the nociceptive response applied by electrical stimulation, suggesting that it may be appropriate for performing surgery.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and S(+)‐ketamine in rabbits

ObjectiveTo evaluate total intravenous anesthesia with propofol alone or in combination with S(+)-ketamine in rabbits undergoing surgery.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded trial.AnimalsNine 6-month-old New Zealand white rabbits, weighing 2.5–3 kg.MethodsAnimals received acepromazine (0.1 mg kg^?1) and buprenorphine (20 μg kg^?1) IM, and anesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg kg^?1) and S(+)-ketamine (1 mg kg^?1) IV. Rabbits received two of three treatments: propofol (0.8 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) (control treatment, P), propofol (0.8 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) + S(+)-ketamine (100 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) (PK100) or propofol (0.8 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) + S(+)-ketamine (200 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) (PK200). All animals received 100% O₂ during anesthesia. Heart rate, mean arterial pressure, hemoglobin oxygen saturation and respiratory rate were measured every 5 minutes for 60 minutes. Blood-gas parameters were measured at zero time and 60 minutes. Additional propofol injections, if necessary, and recovery time were recorded.ResultsAn increase in heart rate was observed in P and PK200 up to 10 minutes after induction of anesthesia. Blood pressure decreased from baseline values during the first 10 minutes in P and PK200, and during the first 15 minutes and between 45 and 55 minutes in PK100. A reduction in respiratory rate was observed after 5 minutes in all treatments. Respiratory acidosis was observed in all treatments. Six (2.8) [median (interquartile range)] further propofol injections were necessary in P, which differed statistically from PK100 [1 (0.2)] and PK200 [2 (0.6)]. Recovery time was shorter in P compared with PK100 and PK200, being [7.5 minutes (4.11)], [17.5 minutes (10.30)], and [12 minutes (10.30)], respectively.Conclusions and clinical relevanceS(+)-ketamine potentiates propofol-induced anesthesia in rabbits, providing better maintenance of heart rate. All of these techniques were accompanied by clinically significant respiratory depression.     

Bispectral index in dogs at three intravenous infusion rates of propofol

ObjectiveTo establish the correlation between the bispectral index (BIS) and different rates of infusion of propofol in dogs.Study designProspective experimental trial.AnimalsEight adult dogs weighing 6–20 kg.MethodsEight animals underwent three treatments at intervals of 20 days. Propofol was used for induction of anesthesia (10 mg kg⁻¹ IV), followed by a continuous rate infusion (CRI) at 0.2 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ (P2), 0.4 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ (P4) or 0.8 mg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ (P8) for 55 minutes. The BIS values were measured at 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 minutes (T10, T20, T30, T40, and T50, respectively) after the CRI of propofol was started. Numeric data were submitted to analysis of variance followed by Tukey test (p < 0.05).ResultsThe BIS differed significantly among groups at T40, when P8 was lower than P2 and P4. At T50, P8 was lower than P2. The electromyographic activity (EMG) in P2 and P4 was higher than P8 at T40 and T50.ConclusionsAn increase in propofol infusion rates decreases the BIS values and EMG.     

Cardiovascular effects of propofol alone and in combination with ketamine for total intravenous anesthesia in healthy cats

This study was designed to compare the cardiovascular effects of equipotent maintenance of anesthetic doses (determined in a previous study) of propofol and propofol/ketamine, administered with and without noxious stimulation. Six healthy adult cats were anesthetized with propofol (loading dose 6.6 mg kg^?1, infusion 0.22 mg kg^?1 minute^?1), and instrumented to allow determination of blood gas and acid–base balance and measurement of blood pressures and cardiac output. The propofol infusion was continued for a further 60 minutes after which measurements were taken prior to and during application of a noxious stimulus. The propofol infusion was decreased to 0.14 mg kg^?1 minute^?1, and ketamine (loading dose 2 mg kg^?1, infusion 23 µg kg minute^?1) was administered. After a further 60 minutes, measurements were again taken prior to and during application of a noxious stimulus. The data were analyzed, using several Repeated Measures anova (first, ketamine/propofol and noxious stimulation were each treated as within‐subject factors; secondly, the levels of these two factors were combined into a single within‐subject factor). Mean arterial pressure, CVP, PAOP, SI, CI, SVRI, PVRI, oxygen delivery index, oxygen consumption index, oxygen utilization ratio, PvO₂, pHa, PaCO₂, bicarbonate concentration, and BD values collected during propofol administration were not changed by addition of ketamine and reduction of propofol concentration or by application of a noxious stimulus under propofol alone. Application of a noxious stimulus under propofol alone did, however, significantly increase HR and PaO₂, and these responses were not blunted by the addition of ketamine. Compared with propofol, administration of ketamine and reduction of propofol concentration significantly increased PAP and venous admixture, and significantly decreased PaO₂. Although application of a noxious stimulus to cats under propofol alone did not significantly change CVP, SI, CI, PVRI, oxygen delivery index, and oxygen consumption index, significant differences were found in these variables between propofol and propofol/ketamine. In conclusion, propofol alone provided cardiopulmonary stability; addition of ketamine did not improve hemodynamics but did decrease oxygenation.     

Cardiopulmonary effects and recovery characteristics of horses anesthetized with xylazine–ketamine with midazolam or propofol

Objective

To evaluate cardiopulmonary and recovery characteristics of horses administered total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with xylazine and ketamine combined with midazolam or propofol.

Evaluation of cardiorespiratory and biochemical effects of ketamine‐propofol and guaifenesin‐ketamine‐xylazine anesthesia in donkeys (Equus asinus)

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cardiorespiratory and biochemical effects of ketamine-propofol (KP) or guaifenesin-ketamine-xylazine (GKX) anesthesia in donkeys.Study designProspective crossover trial.AnimalsEight healthy, standard donkeys, aged 10 ± 5 years and weighing 153 ± 23 kg.MethodsDonkeys were premedicated with 1.0 mg kg^?1 of xylazine (IV) in both treatments. Eight donkeys were administered ketamine (1.5 mg kg^?1) and propofol (0.5 mg kg^?1) for induction, and anesthesia was maintained by constant rate infusion (CRI) of ketamine (0.05 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) and propofol (0.15 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) in the KP treatment. After 10 days, diazepam (0.05 mg kg^?1) and ketamine (2.2 mg kg^?1) were administered for induction, and anesthesia was maintained by a CRI (2.0 mL kg^?1 hour^?1) of ketamine (2.0 mg mL^?1), xylazine (0.5 mg mL^?1) and guaifenesin (50 mg mL^?1) solution. Quality of anesthesia was assessed along with cardiorespiratory and biochemical measurements.ResultsAnesthetic induction took longer in GKX than in KP. The induction was considered good in 7/8 with KP and in 6/8 in GKX. Anesthetic recovery was classified as good in 7/8 animals in both treatments. Xylazine administration decreased heart rate (HR) in both treatments, but in KP the HR increased and was higher than GKX throughout the anesthetic period. Respiratory rate was higher in GKX than in KP. PaO₂ decreased significantly in both groups during the anesthetic period. Glucose concentrations [GLU] increased and rectal temperature and PCV decreased in both treatments. Arterial lactate [LAC] increased at recovery compared with all time points in KP. [GLU] and calcium were higher in GKX than in KP at recovery.Conclusion and clinical relevanceThese protocols induced significant hypoxemia but no other cardiorespiratory or metabolic changes. These protocols could be used to maintain anesthesia in donkeys, however, they were not tested in animals undergoing surgery.     

Comparison of isoflurane and propofol for maintenance of anesthesia in dogs with intracranial disease undergoing magnetic resonance imaging

ObjectiveTo compare isoflurane and propofol for maintenance of anesthesia and quality of recovery in client-owned dogs with intracranial disease undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Study designProspective, randomized, clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty-five client-owned dogs with intracranial pathology, 13 females and 12 males, ages 11 months to 13 years, weighing between 3.0 and 48.0 kg.MethodsEach dog was randomly assigned to receive propofol or isoflurane for maintenance of anesthesia. All dogs were not premedicated, were administered propofol intravenously to effect for induction, intubated and mechanically ventilated to maintain an end-tidal carbon dioxide tension 30–35 mmHg (4.0–4.7 kPa). Temperature and cardiac output were measured pre- and post-MRI. Scores for mentation, neurological status, ease of maintenance, and recovery were obtained pre- and post-anesthesia. Pulse oximetry, end-tidal gases, arterial blood pressure, heart rate (HR) and requirements for dopamine administration to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) >60 mmHg were recorded throughout anesthesia.ResultsEnd-tidal isoflurane concentration was 0.73 ± 0.35% and propofol infusion rate was 292 ± 119 μg kg^?1 minute^?1. Cardiac index was higher, while HR was lower, with propofol than isoflurane in dogs younger than 5 years, but not in older dogs. Dogs maintained with isoflurane were 14.7 times more likely to require dopamine than propofol dogs. Mentation and maintenance scores and temperature were not different. MAP and diastolic arterial pressure were higher in the propofol group. Recovery scores were better with propofol, although times to extubation were similar. Change in neurological score from pre- to post-anesthesia was not different between treatments.ConclusionsDogs maintained with propofol during MRI had higher arterial pressures, decreased requirements for dopamine, and better recovery scores, compared to dogs maintained with isoflurane.Clinical relevancePropofol anesthesia offered cardiovascular and recovery advantages over isoflurane during MRI in dogs with intracranial disease in this study.     

Echocardiographic evaluation of dogs receiving 1:1 thiopental/propofol in a clinical setting

The purpose of this study was to compare the echocardiographic Doppler blood pressure and heart rate effects of 1:1 thiopental/propofol with thiopental and propofol, when used as anesthesia‐induction agents. Seven healthy dogs (six Beagles and one Pembroke Welsh Corgi), ranging in age from 1 to 9 years and weighing 14.2 ± 2.4 kg (mean ± SD), were used during the study. In a cross‐over study design with a minimum drug interval of 3 days, each dog received propofol, thiopental, or a mixture of propofol–thiopental IV until each dog received all the three anesthetic agents. An initial dose (propofol 4.9 ± 0.8 mg kg^?1; thiopental 12.9 ± 2.4 mg kg^?1; propofol–thiopental 2.3 ± 0.3 mg kg^?1 (P)?5.7 ± 0.8 mg kg^?1 (T)) of each anesthetic agent was titrated IV until intubation was accomplished. Echocardiographic Doppler blood pressure and heart rate variables were recorded prior to anesthesia and at 1, 5, and 10 minutes after induction of anesthesia. anova and the Bonferroni's t‐test were used to evaluate the groups for differences. Alpha was <0.05. There was no significant effect of treatment on systolic or diastolic ventricular wall thickness, septal thickness, left atrial diameter, or systolic left ventricular diameter. There was a tendency for diastolic left ventricular diameter to decrease over time. There was a tendency for heart rate to increase with a significant difference at the 10‐minute time period between propofol (109 ± 26 beats minute^?1) and thiopental (129 ± 23 beats minute^?1). At the 10‐minute recording period, heart rate following the propofol/thiopental mixture (110 ± 34 beats minute^?1) was closer to that following propofol than to that following thiopental. With all induction agents, indirect blood pressure tended to decrease over time (p = 0.005); however, there was no difference between the groups. The changes observed were not considered to be of clinical significance. The propofol/thiopental mixture produces similar changes in echocardiographic variables when compared to propofol or thiopental, and could be substituted for propofol for induction of anesthesia in dogs.     

The cardiopulmonary effects of anesthetic induction with isoflurane,ketamine‐diazepam or propofol‐diazepam in the hypovolemic dog

ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare the cardiopulmonary effects of induction of anesthesia with isoflurane (Iso), ketamine–diazepam (KD), or propofol–diazepam (PD) in hypovolemic dogs.Study designProspective randomized cross–over trial.AnimalsSix healthy intact, mixed breed, female dogs weighing 20.7 ± 4.2 kg and aged 22 ± 2 months.MethodsDogs had 30 mL kg^?1 of blood removed at a rate of 1.5 mL kg^?1 minute^?1 under isoflurane anesthesia. Following a 30–minute recovery period, anesthesia was reinduced. Dogs were assigned to one of three treatments: isoflurane via facemask using 0.5% incremental increases in the delivered concentration every 30 seconds, 1.25 mg kg^?1 ketamine and 0.0625 mg kg^?1 diazepam intravenously (IV) with doses repeated every 30 seconds as required, and 2 mg kg^?1 propofol and 0.2 mg kg^?1 diazepam IV followed by 1 mg kg^?1 propofol increments IV every 30 seconds as required. Following endotracheal intubation all dogs received 1.7% end–tidal isoflurane in oxygen. Cardiopulmonary variables were recorded at baseline (before induction) and at 5 or 10 minute intervals following endotracheal intubation.ResultsInduction time was longer in Iso (4.98 ± 0.47 minutes) compared to KD (3.10 ± 0.47 minutes) or PD (3.22 ± 0.45 minutes). To produce anesthesia, KD received 4.9 ± 2.3 mg kg^?1 ketamine and 0.24 ± 0.1 mg kg^?1 diazepam, while PD received 2.2 ± 0.4 mg kg^?1 propofol and 0.2 mg kg^?1 diazepam. End–tidal isoflurane concentration immediately following intubation was 1.7 ± 0.4% in Iso. Arterial blood pressure and heart rate were significantly higher in KD and PD compared to Iso and in KD compared to PD. Arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure was significantly higher in PD compared to KD and Iso immediately after induction.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIn hypovolemic dogs, KD or PD, as used in this study to induce anesthesia, resulted in less hemodynamic depression compared to isoflurane.     

Midazolam,as a co‐induction agent,has propofol sparing effects but also decreases systolic blood pressure in healthy dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of the co-administration of midazolam on the dose requirement for propofol anesthesia induction, heart rate (HR), systolic arterial pressure (SAP) and the incidence of excitement.Study designProspective, randomized, controlled and blinded clinical study, with owner consent.AnimalsSeventeen healthy, client owned dogs weighing 28 ± 18 kg and aged 4.9 ± 3.9 years old.MethodsDogs were sedated with acepromazine 0.025 mg kg^?1 and morphine 0.25 mg kg^?1 intramuscularly (IM), 30 minutes prior to induction of anesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated to receive midazolam (MP; 0.2 mg kg^?1) or sterile normal saline (CP; 0.04 mL kg^?1) intravenously (IV) over 15 seconds. Propofol was administered IV immediately following test drug and delivered at 3 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 until intubation was possible. Scoring of pre-induction sedation, ease of intubation, quality of induction, and presence or absence of excitement following co-induction agent, was recorded. HR, SAP and respiratory rate (f_R) were obtained immediately prior to, immediately following, and 5 minutes following induction of anesthesia.ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups with regard to weight, age, gender, or sedation. Excitement occurred in 5/9 dogs following midazolam administration, with none noted in the control group. The dose of propofol administered to the midazolam group was significantly less than in the control group. Differences in HR were not significant between groups. SAP was significantly lower in the midazolam group compared with baseline values 5 minutes after its administration. However, values remained clinically acceptable.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe co-administration of midazolam with propofol decreased the total dose of propofol needed for induction of anesthesia in sedated healthy dogs, caused some excitement and a clinically unimportant decrease in SAP.     

Total intravenous anesthesia in domestic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) with propofol alone or in combination with methadone,nalbuphine or fentanyl for ulna osteotomy

ObjectiveTo compare the propofol infusion rate and cardiopulmonary effects during total intravenous anesthesia with propofol alone and propofol combined with methadone, fentanyl or nalbuphine in domestic chickens undergoing ulna osteotomy.Study designProspective, randomized, experiment trial.AnimalsA total of 59 healthy Hissex Brown chickens weighing 1.5 ± 0.2 kg.MethodsAnesthesia was induced with propofol (9 mg kg^–1) administered intravenously (IV) and maintained with propofol (1.2 mg kg^–1 minute^–1) for 30 minutes. Birds were intubated and supplemented with 100% oxygen through a nonrebreathing circuit under spontaneous ventilation. Thereafter, each animal was randomly assigned to one of four groups: group P, no treatment; group PM, methadone (6 mg kg^–1) intramuscularly (IM); group PN, nalbuphine IM (12.5 mg kg^–1); and group PF, fentanyl IV (30 μg kg^–1 loading dose, 30 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 constant rate infusion). During the osteotomy surgery, the propofol infusion rate was adjusted to avoid movement of birds and provide adequate anesthesia. Pulse rate, invasive blood pressure, respiratory frequency, end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (Pe′CO₂) and hemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO₂) were recorded.ResultsData were available from 58 chickens. The mean ± standard deviation propofol infusion rate (mg kg^–1 minute^–1) for the duration of anesthesia was: group P, 0.81 ± 0.15; group PM, 0.66 ± 0.11; group PN, 0.60 ± 0.14; and group PF, 0.80 ± 0.07. Significant differences were P versus PM (p = 0.042), P versus PN (p = 0.002) and PF versus PN (p = 0.004). Pulse rate, blood pressure and SpO₂ remained acceptable for anesthetized birds with minor differences among groups. Values of Pe′CO₂ >60 mmHg (8 kPa) were observed in all groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMethadone and nalbuphine, but not fentanyl, decreased the propofol infusion rate required for anesthesia maintenance, but resulted in no obvious benefit in physiological variables.     

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).

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.     

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.     

Propofol–medetomidine–ketamine total intravenous anaesthesia in thiafentanil–medetomidine-immobilized impala (Aepyceros melampus)

Objective

To characterize a propofol–medetomidine-ketamine total intravenous anaesthetic in impala (Aepyceros melampus).

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.