Total intravenous anaesthesia in the horse with propofol

The use of propofol, solubilised in a non-ionic emulsifying agent, for the induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in experimental ponies was assessed. Pilot studies revealed that premedication with xylazine (0.5 mg/kg bodyweight [bwt]) intravenously (iv) followed by propofol (2.0 mg/kg bwt) iv provided a satisfactory smooth induction. Two infusion rates (0.15 mg/kg bwt/min and 0.2 mg/kg bwt/min) were compared for maintenance of anaesthesia. An infusion rate of 0.2 mg/kg/min produced adequate anaesthesia in these ponies. Cardiovascular changes included a decrease in arterial pressure and cardiac output during maintenance. Respiratory depression was manifested by a decrease in rate and an increase in arterial carbon dioxide tension. Recovery after 1 h anaesthesia was rapid and smooth. In conclusion, induction and maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol in premedicated ponies proved a satisfactory technique.     

Evaluation of an anaesthetic technique used in dogs undergoing craniectomy for tumour resection

ObjeCTIVE: To evaluate a total intravenous anaesthetic technique in dogs undergoing craniectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective clinical study. ANIMALS: Ten dogs admitted for elective surgical resection of rostro-tentorial tumours. METHODS: All dogs were premedicated with methadone, 0.2 mg kg(-1) intramuscularly 30 minutes prior to induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol administered intravenously (IV) to effect, following administration of lidocaine 1 mg kg(-1) IV and maintained with a continuous infusion of propofol at < or =0.4 mg kg(-1) minute(-1) during instrumentation and preparation and during movement of the animals to recovery. During surgery, anaesthesia was maintained using a continuous infusion of propofol at 相似文献   

A comparison of propofol infusion and propofol/isoflurane anaesthesia in dexmedetomidine premedicated dogs

The effects of propofol infusion were compared with propofol/isoflurane anaesthesia in six beagles premedicated with 10 microg/kg intramuscular (i.m.) dexmedetomidine. The suitability of a cold pressor test (CPT) as a stress stimulus in dogs was also studied. Each dog received isoflurane (end tidal 1.0%, induction with propofol) with and without CPT; propofol (200 microg/kg/min, induction with propofol) with and without CPT; premedication alone with and without CPT in a randomized block study in six separate sessions. Heart rate and arterial blood pressures and gases were monitored. Plasma catecholamine, beta-endorphin and cortisol concentrations were measured. Recovery profile was observed. Blood pressures stayed within normal reference range but the dogs were bradycardic (mean heart rate < 70 bpm). PaCO2 concentration during anaesthesia was higher in the propofol group (mean > 57 mmHg) when compared with isoflurane (mean < 52 mmHg). Recovery times were longer with propofol than when compared with the other treatments. The mean extubation times were 8 +/- 3.4 and 23 +/- 6.3 min after propofol/isoflurane and propofol anaesthesia, respectively. The endocrine stress response was similar in all treatments except for lower adrenaline level after propofol infusion at the end of the recovery period. Cold pressor test produced variable responses and was not a reliable stress stimulus in the present study. Propofol/isoflurane anaesthesia was considered more useful than propofol infusion because of milder degree of respiratory depression and faster recovery.     

A clinical trial of propofol infusion anaesthesia in dogs

Studies were carried out on 40 dogs premedicated with acepromazine (0·05 mg. kg^-1) and atropine (0·02 mg. kg^-1) to determine the minimum infusion rate of propofol needed to maintain anaesthesia and to compare the quality of the anaesthesia with that produced by halothane/nitrous oxide/oxygen. In 30 dogs anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with a continuous infusion and in the other ten dogs anaesthesia was induced with thiopentone and maintained with the inhalation agents. An infusion rate of 0·4 mg. kg^-1 min^-1 of propofol produced surgical anaesthesia in dogs breathing oxygen or oxygen-enriched air. Cardiovascular and respiratory effects were similar to those in dogs anaesthetized with halothane/nitrous oxide and with both anaesthetic regimens myocardial oxygen consumption appeared to increase with increasing duration of anaesthesia. A possible familial susceptibility resulting in a more prolonged recovery was revealed and propofol infusion was associated with a 16 per cent incidence of vomiting in the recovery period. It was concluded that in canine anaesthesia the continuous infusion of propofol to maintain anaesthesia in healthy dogs was safe but less satisfactory than the use of halothane/nitrous oxide.     

A comparison of the effects of two different doses of ketamine used for co-induction of anaesthesia with a target-controlled infusion of propofol in dogs

ObjectiveTo assess the cardiorespiratory and hypnotic-sparing effects of ketamine co-induction with target-controlled infusion of propofol in dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded clinical study.AnimalsNinety healthy dogs (ASA grades I/II). Mean body mass 30.5 ± SD 8.6 kg and mean age 4.2 ± 2.6 years.MethodsAll dogs received pre-anaesthetic medication with acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^?1) and morphine (0.2 mg kg^?1) administered intramuscularly 30 minutes prior to induction of anaesthesia. Heart rate and respiratory rate were recorded prior to pre-medication. Animals were allocated into three different groups: Group 1 (control) received 0.9% NaCl, group 2, 0.25 mg kg^?1 ketamine and group 3, 0.5 mg kg^?1 ketamine, intravenously 1 minute prior to induction of anaesthesia, which was accomplished using a propofol target-controlled infusion system. The target propofol concentration was gradually increased until endotracheal intubation was possible and the target concentration at intubation was recorded. Heart rate, respiratory rate and noninvasive blood pressure were recorded immediately prior to induction, at successful intubation and at 3 and 5 minutes post-intubation. The quality of induction was graded according to the amount of muscle twitching and paddling observed. Data were analysed using a combination of chi-squared tests, Fisher's exact tests, Kruskal–Wallis, and anova with significance assumed at p< 0.05.ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups in the blood propofol targets required to achieve endotracheal intubation, nor with respect to heart rate, noninvasive blood pressure or quality of induction. Compared with the other groups, the incidence of post-induction apnoea was significantly higher in group 3, but despite this dogs in this group had higher respiratory rates overall.Conclusions and clinical relevanceUnder the conditions of this study, ketamine does not seem to be a useful agent for co-induction of anaesthesia with propofol in dogs.     

PROPOFOL INFUSION ANAESTHESIA IN DOGS

Studies were carried out on 40 dogs premedicated with acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^-1), and atropine (0.02 mg kg^-1) to determine the minimum infusion rate of propofol needed to maintain anaesthesia and to compare the quality of the anaesthesia with that produced by halothane/nitrous oxide/oxygen. An infusion rate of 0.4 mg kg^-1 min^-1 of propofol produced surgical anaesthesia in dogs breathing oxygen or oxygen-enriched air. Cardiovascular and respiratory effects were similar to those in dogs anaesthetized with halothane/nitrous oxide and with both anaesthetic regimes myocardial oxygen consumption appeared to increase with increasing duration of anaesthesia. Propofol infusion was associated with a 16 per cent incidence of vomiting in the recovery period. Maintenance of anaesthesia in healthy dogs by the continuous infusion of propofol appeared to be safe but less satisfactory than the use of halothane/nitrous oxide.     

Clinical investigation of remifentanil and propofol for the total intravenous anaesthesia of dogs

Fifteen adult dogs underwent elective ovariectomy. They were premedicated with 0.5 mg/kg methadone and 0.05 mg/kg(-1) atropine administered intramuscularly, and anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with intravenous infusions of remifentanil at 0.6 microg/kg/minute and propofol; the mean (sd) rate of infusion of propofol throughout the period of anaesthesia was 0.33 (0.03) mg/kg/minute. The dogs were ventilated continuously with oxygen while they were anaesthetised. Their haemodynamic parameters were clinically acceptable during the period of anaesthesia. Two dogs received additional atropine to correct bradycardias of less than 60 bpm and several dogs received additional boluses of remifentanil or propofol to maintain an adequate depth of anaesthesia, as determined by a clinical assessment. The mean (range) time to the return of spontaneous respiration after stopping the remifentanil infusion was 11.1 (6.0 to 17.0) minutes, and the mean (range) time to the dogs standing was 38.0 (20.0 to 80.0) minutes. The quality of recovery was good in 12 of the dogs, two showed mild excitation in the immediate postoperative period and the other dog required additional analgesia with methadone.     

Anaesthetic and cardiorespiratory effects of propofol at 10% for induction and 1% for maintenance of anaesthesia in horses

Reasons for performing study: Studies have demonstrated the clinical usefulness of propofol for anaesthesia in horses but the use of a concentrated solution requires further investigation. Objectives: To determine the anaesthetic and cardiorespiratory responses to a bolus injection of 10% propofol solution in mature horses. Methods: Three randomised crossover experimental trials were completed. Trial 1: 6 horses were selected randomly to receive 10% propofol (2, 4 or 8 mg/kg bwt i.v.). Trial 2: 6 horses received 1.1 mg/kg bwt i.v. xylazine before being assigned at random to receive one of 5 different doses (1–5 mg/kg bwt) of 10% propofol. Trial 3: 6 horses were sedated with xylazine (0.5 mg/kg bwt, i.v.) and assigned randomly to receive 10% propofol (3, 4 or 5 mg/kg bwt, i.v.); anaesthesia was maintained for 60 min using an infusion of 1% propofol (0.2‐0.4 mg/kg bwt/min). Cardiorespiratory data, the quality of anaesthesia, and times for induction, maintenance and recovery from anaesthesia and the number of attempts to stand were recorded. Results: Trial 1 was terminated after 2 horses had received each dose of 10% propofol. The quality of induction, anaesthesia and recovery from anaesthesia was judged to be unsatisfactory. Trial 2: 3 horses administered 1 mg/kg bwt and one administered 2 mg/kg bwt were not considered to be anaesthetised. Horses administered 3–5 mg/kg bwt i.v. propofol were anaesthetised for periods ranging from approximately 10–25 min. The PaO₂ was significantly decreased in horses administered 3–5 mg/kg bwt i.v. propofol. Trial 3: The quality of induction and recovery from anaesthesia were judged to be acceptable in all horses. Heart rate and rhythm, and arterial blood pressure were unchanged or decreased slightly during propofol infusion period. Conclusions: Anaesthesia can be induced with a 10% propofol solution and maintained with a 1% propofol solution in horses administered xylazine as preanaesthetic medication. Hypoventilation and hypoxaemia may occur following administration to mature horses. Potential relevance: Adequate preanaesthetic sedation and oxygen supplementation are required in horses anaesthetised with propofol.     

Speed of induction of anaesthesia in dogs administered halothane, isoflurane, sevoflurane or propofol in a clinical setting

OBJECTIVE: To compare the speed and quality of induction of general anaesthesia using three different inhalant agents and one intravenous agent, in healthy dogs undergoing desexing surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Less excitable dogs were not premedicated; others were premedicated with intramuscular acepromazine and morphine. Anaesthesia induction protocol was randomly assigned, with halothane, isoflurane or sevoflurane delivered by mask, or propofol delivered intravenously. Maximum vaporiser settings were used for inhalant inductions. Induction of anaesthesia was considered complete at the time of endotracheal intubation. Quality of induction was scored by the administering veterinarian. RESULTS: Seventy-one dogs were enrolled. Twenty-four received no premedication and 47 received premedication. Isoflurane inductions were significantly faster than halothane inductions (2.86 +/- 0.25 vs 3.71 +/- 0.22 min; mean +/- SE, P = 0.013). Sevoflurane inductions (3.29 +/- 0.24 min) were not significantly different from either halothane (3.71 +/- 0.22 min, P = 0.202) or isoflurane inductions (2.86 +/- 0.25 min, P = 0.217). Induction with propofol (1.43 +/- 0.13 min) was significantly faster than inhalant induction (P < 0.001 in each case). Premedication decreased the dose requirement and time to induction for dogs induced with propofol, but did not significantly change the time to intubation for inhalant inductions. Dogs administered propofol and/or premedication were significantly more likely to have an excellent quality of induction, but there was no difference between inhalant agents in terms of induction quality. CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane possesses chemical properties that should produce a more rapid induction of anaesthesia in comparison to halothane or isoflurane. However, in clinical practice patient related factors outweigh this improvement.     

Comparison of alfaxalone and propofol administered as total intravenous anaesthesia for ovariohysterectomy in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the anaesthetic and cardiopulmonary effects of alfaxalone with propofol when used for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) during ovariohysterectomy in dogs.Study designA prospective non-blinded randomized clinical study.AnimalsFourteen healthy female crossbred bitches, aged 0.5–5 years and weight 16–42 kg.MethodsDogs were premedicated with acepromazine 0.01 mg kg^?1 and morphine 0.4 mg kg^?1. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with either propofol or alfaxalone to effect for tracheal intubation followed by an infusion of the same agent. Dogs breathed spontaneously via a ‘circle’ circuit, with oxygen supplementation. Cardiopulmonary parameters (respiratory and heart rates, end-tidal carbon dioxide, tidal volume, and invasive blood pressures) were measured continuously and recorded at intervals related to the surgical procedure. Arterial blood samples were analysed for blood gas values. Quality of induction and recovery, and recovery times were determined. Non-parametric data were tested for significant differences between groups using the Mann–Whitney U-test and repeatedly measured data (normally distributed) for significant differences between and within groups by anova.ResultsBoth propofol and alphaxalone injection and subsequent infusions resulted in smooth, rapid induction and satisfactory maintenance of anaesthesia. Doses for induction (mean ± SD) were 5.8 ± 0.30 and 1.9 ± 0.07 mg kg^?1 and for the CRIs, 0.37 ± 0.09 and 0.11 ± 0.01 mg kg^?1 per minute for propofol and alfaxalone respectively. Median (IQR) recovery times were to sternal 45 (33–69) and 60 (46–61) and to standing 74 (69–76) and 90 (85–107) for propofol and alphaxalone respectively. Recovery quality was good. Cardiopulmonary effects did not differ between groups. Hypoventilation occurred in both groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceFollowing premedication with acepromazine and morphine, both propofol and alphaxalone produce good quality anaesthesia adequate for ovariohysterectomy. Hypoventilation occurs suggesting a need for ventilatory support during prolonged infusion periods with either anaesthetic agent.     

Induction of anaesthesia in dogs and cats with propofol

Propofol was used to induce anaesthesia in 89 dogs and 13 cats of either sex, various breeds and of widely different ages and weights; they varied considerably in physical condition and were anaesthetised for a variety of investigations and surgical procedures. They were premedicated with acepromazine, papaveretum, diazepam, pethidine, atropine and scopolamine in different combinations. After induction with propofol, anaesthesia was maintained with halothane, isoflurane, methoxyflurane and enflurane and, or, nitrous oxide. The mean (+/- sd) induction doses of propofol in unpremedicated and premedicated animals were 5.2 +/- 2.3 mg/kg and 3.6 +/- 1.4 mg/kg respectively for dogs, and 5.0 +/- 2.8 mg/kg and 5.3 +/- 4.3 mg/kg for cats. There were no differences between the sexes. Premedication did not affect recovery times. The incidence of side effects was very low. One dog showed evidence of pain when propofol was injected. No incompatibility was observed between propofol and the premedicants and other anaesthetic agents used.     

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.     

Clinical evaluation of a new formulation of propofol in a medium-chain and long-chain triglycerides emulsion in dogs

Propofol formulated in a mixed medium-chain and long-chain triglycerides emulsion has been recently introduced for clinical use as an alternative to the conventional long-chain triglycerides formulation. This prospective multicentric study evaluated the clinical effectiveness and the complications associated with the use of this new formulation of propofol in dogs. Forty-six Spanish veterinary clinics participated in this study. A total of 541 anaesthesias (118 ASA I, 290 ASA II, 101 ASA III and 32 ASA IV) performed for various diagnostic and therapeutic purposes were evaluated. The anaesthetic protocol was not controlled, with the exception that propofol had to be used at least for induction of anaesthesia. The induction dose of propofol and the incidence of anaesthetic complications throughout the procedure were recorded. A chi-square test compared the incidence of complications according to the maintenance agent used (propofol vs. inhalatory anaesthesia), anaesthetic risk (ASA classification) and the reason for the anaesthesia. The patients premedicated with alpha2 agonists needed lower doses (mean +/- SD, 2.9 +/- 1.3 mg/kg i.v.) than the animals premedicated with phenothiazines (3.9 +/- 1.4 mg/kg i.v.) or benzodiazepines (4.0 +/- 1.4 mg/kg i.v.). The most frequent complications were difficult endotracheal intubation (1.3%), postinduction apnoea (11.3%), cyanosis (0.6%), bradypnoea (2.6%), tachypnoea (2.8%), bradycardia (2%), tachycardia (2.6%), hypotension (0.2%), shock (0.2%), vomiting (4.6%), epileptiform seizures (2.8%), premature awakening (7.4%) and delayed recovery (0.9%). There were no cases of pain on injection or aspiration pneumonia. Three dogs died (0.55%), one during induction and two during recovery from anaesthesia. This study demonstrates that the new formulation of propofol is an useful and effective drug to induce general anaesthesia in dogs.     

Long-term anaesthesia with propofol and alfentanil in the dog and its partial reversal with nalbuphine

Prolonged surgical anaesthesia in the dog was induced with propofol (6.5 ± 1.3 mg/kg) followed by alfentanil (25.5 ± 5 μg/kg) (mean ± 1 sd) and maintained with a continuous infusion of propofol (0.14 to 0.18 mg/kg/min) and alfentanil (2 to 3 μg/kg/min). Neuromuscular blockade was produced with vecuronium (0.1 mg/kg). After induction of anaesthesia with propofol, administration of alfentanil to dogs which had received no pre-anaesthetic medication produced cardiac arrest and apnoea. Administration of atropine intravenously immediately prior to alfentanil prevented these cardiac depressant effects. The cardiac depressant effect of alfentanil was not as severe in a second group of dogs in which anaesthesia was induced with thiopentone. After commencing the continuous infusion anaesthetic regime and establishment of IPPV, blood pressure and heart rate remained stable during the remaining 4 to 6 h period of anaesthesia. Recovery from anaesthesia was smooth and uneventful. The depressant effects of alfentanil on respiration and on consciousness were reversed rapidly by administration of nalbuphine (10 mg total dose). The smooth recovery and the integration of anaesthesia and post operative analgesia attained by the reversal of alfentanil with nalbuphine make this an attractive anaesthetic regime for major surgery in dogs, provided that facilities for IPPV are available.     

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

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

Effect of propofol on oxidative stress status in erythrocytes from dogs under general anaesthesia

Background

Alterations of the normal redox balance might be attributed to increase of plasma free-radical concentration and a disruption of the antioxidant defense system. One of the adverse effects of general anaesthetics is the exogen sources of reactive oxygen radicals that are responsible for several diseases. The purposes of the current study were to evaluate the effect of propofol on oxidative stress and to compare the differences between propofol induction only and induction plus continuous infusion on antioxidant status in dogs.

Findings

Beagle dogs were evaluated in the present study. The dogs were assigned randomly to receive three treatments in a crossover model. The three treatments were: group 1 (n = 9), 2% isoflurane; group 2 (n = 9), anaesthesia induced with an intravenous (IV) bolus dose of 6 mg/kg propofol and maintained with 1.5–2% isoflurane; group 3 (n = 9), total IV anaesthesia (induction with 6 mg/kg propofol, infusion with 0.6 mg/kg/min propofol). The results of this study show that dogs exposed to isoflurane had decreased antioxidant enzymes activities, whereas dogs injected with propofol had increased antioxidant enzymes activities.

Conclusions

The results of this study showed that an infusion dose of propofol has antioxidant effects in dogs. These effects may be beneficial to patients in whom free radicals play a role in oxidative stress, such as those with ischemia. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether these antioxidant effects of the anaesthetic are of clinical value.     

Median effective dosage of propofol for induction of anesthesia in dogs.

The median effective dosage (ED50) of propofol for induction of anesthesia was determined in 25 dogs premedicated with acepromazine, 0.05 mg/kg of body weight, and in 35 unpremedicated dogs. The ED50 was found to be 2.2 mg/kg in premedicated dogs and was 3.8 mg/kg in unpremedicated dogs. The mean +/- SD total dosage of propofol required to induce anesthesia in premedicated animals was 2.8 +/- 0.5 mg/kg and was 4.7 +/- 1.3 mg/kg in unpremedicated animals. Signs of excitement were observed in 5 of the unpremedicated dogs, but in none of those that were premedicated.     

Comparison of quality of induction of anaesthesia between intramuscularly administered ketamine, intravenously administered ketamine and intravenously administered propofol in xylazine premedicated cats

The quality of induction of general anesthesia produced by ketamine and propofol, 2 of the most commonly used anaesthetic agents in cats, was assessed. Eighteen cats admitted for elective procedures were randomly assigned to 3 groups and then premedicated with xylazine 0.75 mg/kg intramuscularly before anaesthesia was induced with ketamine 15 mg/kg intramuscularly (KetIM group), ketamine 10 mg/kg intravenously (KetIV group) or propofol 4 mg/kg intravenously (PropIV group). Quality of induction of general anaesthesia was determined by scoring ease of intubation, degree of struggling, and vocalisation during the induction period. The quality of induction of anaesthesia of intramuscularly administered ketamine was inferior to that of intravenously administered ketamine, while intravenously administered propofol showed little difference in quality of induction from ketamine administered by both the intramuscular and intravenous routes. There were no significant differences between groups in the ease of intubation scores, while vocalisation and struggling were more common in cats that received ketamine intramuscularly than in those that received intravenously administered ketamine or propofol for induction of anaesthesia. Laryngospasms occurred in 2 cats that received propofol. The heart rates and respiratory rates decreased after xylazine premedication and either remained the same or decreased further after induction for all 3 groups, but remained within normal acceptable limits. This study indicates that the 3 regimens are associated with acceptable induction characteristics, but administration of ketamine intravenously is superior to its administration intramuscularly and laryngeal desensitisation is recommended to avoid laryngospasms.     

Comparative study of propofol or propofol and ketamine for the induction of anaesthesia in dogs

The effects of propofol alone or propofol and ketamine for the induction of anaesthesia in dogs were compared. Thirty healthy dogs were premedicated with acepromazine and pethidine, then randomly allocated to either treatment. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol (4 mg/kg bodyweight intravenously) (group 1), or propofol and ketamine (2 mg/kg bodyweight of each intravenously) (group 2). Anaesthesia was maintained with halothane, delivered in a mixture of oxygen and nitrous oxide (1:2) via a non-rebreathing Bain circuit. Various cardiorespiratory parameters were monitored at two, five, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 minutes after induction, and the animals were observed during anaesthesia and recovery, and any adverse effects were recorded. During anaesthesia, the heart rate, but not the systolic arterial pressure, was consistently higher in group 2 (range 95 to 102 beats per minute) than in group 1 (range 73 to 90 beats per minute). Post-induction apnoea was more common in group 2 (11 of 15) than in group 1 (six of 15). Muscle twitching was observed in three dogs in each group. Recovery times were similar in both groups. Propofol followed by ketamine was comparable with propofol alone for the induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs.