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

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

Determination of the sevoflurane sparing effect of methadone in cats

ObjectiveTo determine the magnitude and duration of sevoflurane minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) reduction following a single intravenous (IV) dose of methadone in cats.Study designProspective experimental study.AnimalsEight (four females and four males) healthy mixed-breed adult (1–2 years) cats weighing 5.82 ± 0.42 kg.MethodsAnesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane. Intravenous catheters facilitated administration of methadone and lactated Ringer’s solution. After baseline MAC determination in triplicate using a tail clamp technique, 0.3 mg kg^?1 of methadone was administered IV. End-tidal sevoflurane concentration (e′SEVO) was reduced and MAC was redetermined. In an effort to determine the duration of MAC reduction, measurements were repeated in a stepwise manner until MAC values returned to baseline. After the last stimulation, the e′SEVO was increased to 1.2 individual MAC for 15 minutes, then sevoflurane was discontinued and cats were allowed to recover from anesthesia.ResultsBaseline sevoflurane MAC was 3.18 ± 0.06%. When compared with baseline the sevoflurane MAC after methadone administration was significantly reduced by 25, 15 and 7% at 26, 76 and 122 minutes, respectively. The final MAC value (3.09 ± 0.07%) determined 156 minutes after methadone administration was not significantly different from baseline.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIntravenous methadone (0.3 mg kg^?1) significantly decreased MAC of sevoflurane in cats but the effect was short-lived.     

Effects of continuous intravenous infusion of morphine and morphine‐tramadol on the minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane and electroencephalographic entropy indices in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the effects of continuous rate infusions (CRIs) of intravenous (IV) morphine and morphine-tramadol on the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane, and on electroencephalographic entropy indices in dogs.DesignProspective study.AnimalsEight young, healthy German shepherds, weighing 26.3 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± SD).MethodsAnaesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane. A standard tail-clamp technique was used for MAC determination. Within one anaesthetic period, MAC was first determined during sevoflurane anaesthesia alone (MAC_B); then during morphine infusion (MAC_M), (loading dose 0.5 mg kg⁻¹IM; CRI, 0.2 mg kg⁻¹hour⁻¹⁾ then finally during morphine-tramadol infusion (tramadol loading dose 1.5 mg kg⁻¹IV; CRI, 2.6 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹) (MAC_MT). At each change, periods of 45 minutes were allowed for equilibration. Stated entropy (SE), response entropy (RE), and RE-SE differences were measured five minutes prior to and during tail clamping.ResultsThe MAC_B was 2.1 ± 0.3vol%. The morphine and morphine-tramadol infusions reduced MAC to 1.6 ± 0.3vol% and 1.3 ± 0.3vol%, respectively. MAC was decreased below baseline more during morphine-tramadol than during morphine alone (39 ± 9% versus 25 ± 6%, respectively; p = 0.003). All SE and RE and most RE-SE differences were increased significantly (p < 0.05) over pre-stimulation in all groups when the dogs responded purposefully to noxious stimulation. When no response to noxious stimulation occurred, the entropy indices did not change.Conclusion and clinical relevanceIn dogs, combined morphine-tramadol CRI decreased sevoflurane MAC more than morphine CRI alone. Entropy indices changed during nociceptive responses in anaesthetized animals, suggesting that entropy measurements may be useful in determining anaesthetic depth in dogs.     

Maropitant prevented vomiting but not gastroesophageal reflux in anesthetized dogs premedicated with acepromazine‐hydromorphone

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of maropitant for prevention of vomiting and gastroesophageal reflux (GER) in dogs following acepromazine-hydromorphone premedication and inhalation anesthesia.Study designRandomized, blinded, prospective clinical study.AnimalsTwenty-six dogs admitted for elective soft tissue or orthopedic procedures that were 3.1 ±3.1 years of age and weighed 20.5 ± 11.4 kg.MethodsDogs were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group M received maropitant (1.0 mg kg^?1) and Group S received 0.9% saline (0.1 mL kg^?1) intravenously 45–60 minutes before premedication with hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^?1) and acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^?1) intramuscularly. An observer blinded to treatment documented any retching or vomiting for 20 minutes before induction with propofol (2–6 mg kg^?1) and inhalation anesthesia. A pH probe inserted into the distal esophagus was used to detect GER.ResultsNone of the dogs in Group M retched or vomited (0/13), 6/13 (46%) in Group S were observed to retch or vomit, and the difference between groups was significant (p = 0.015). There were no differences between groups in the number of dogs with GER (Group M: 4/13, Group S: 6/13 dogs) or the number of reflux events. Esophageal pH at the end of anesthesia was significantly lower in both M and S groups in dogs with GER versus dogs without GER (p = 0.004 and 0.011, respectively). Only dogs with GER in Group S had significantly lower pH at the end compared to the beginning of anesthesia (p = 0.004).Conclusions and clinical relevanceIntravenous maropitant prevented retching and vomiting associated with acepromazine-hydromorphone premedication. Maropitant did not prevent the occurrence of GER. Fewer dogs in Group M developed GER but further study with a larger number of dogs is necessary to determine if there is a significant difference.     

A dog model to study ovary, ovarian ligament and visceral pain

Objective A dog model was developed to study visceral pain by stimulating the ovarian ligament. Study design Prospective experimental trial. Animals Twelve 1‐year old female hound dogs weighing 25.7 ± 3.6 kg. Methods Dogs were anesthetized with sevoflurane. The right ovary was accessed via laparoscopy. A suture was placed around the ovarian ligament and exteriorized through the abdominal wall for stimulation. The noxious stimulus consisted of pulling the ovary and ovarian ligament with a force transducer. The response to noxious stimulation was determined using the anesthetic minimum alveolar concentration requirement (MAC) for sevoflurane. The ovarian MAC was compared to the standardized somatic noxious stimulation tail clamp MAC. The results are depicted as mean ± SD and corrected to sea‐level. Results The stimulus–response curve during ovarian stimulation in three dogs was hyperbolic and best represented by a three‐parameter logistic growth curve model. The curve plateaued at 7.12 ± 4.19 N. From the stimulus‐response curve, we chose 6.61 N to test the consistency and repeatability of the model in nine dogs. The ovarian stimulation MAC for sevoflurane in these dogs was 2.16 ± 0.46%. The ovarian stimulation confidence interval and limits are comparable to the results from tail stimulation MAC. The tail stimulation MACs before and after laparoscopy surgery were not different (1.86 ± 0.28% and 1.77 ± 0.38% respectively; p > 0.05) but lower when compared to the ovarian MAC (p < 0.01). The dogs recovered from anesthesia without complications. Conclusions and clinical relevance The ovarian stimulation model is an adequate and repeatable means of producing visceral stimulation to determine MAC. The model may provide a humane mechanism to study the effectiveness of analgesics for acute ovarian pain.     

Effects of tramadol on the minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of tramadol on sevoflurane minimum alveolar concentration (MAC_SEVO) in dogs. It was hypothesized that tramadol would dose-dependently decrease MAC_SEVO.Study designRandomized crossover experimental study.AnimalsSix healthy, adult female mixed-breed dogs (24.2 ± 2.6 kg).MethodsEach dog was studied on two occasions with a 7-day washout period. Anesthesia was induced using sevoflurane delivered via a mask. Baseline MAC (MAC_B) was determined starting 45 minutes after tracheal intubation. A noxious stimulus (50 V, 50 Hz, 10 ms) was applied subcutaneously over the mid-humeral area. If purposeful movement occurred, the end-tidal sevoflurane was increased by 0.1%; otherwise, it was decreased by 0.1%, and the stimulus was re-applied after a 20-minute equilibration. After MAC_B determination, dogs randomly received a tramadol loading dose of either 1.5 mg kg^?1 followed by a continuous rate infusion (CRI) of 1.3 mg kg^?1 hour^?1 (T1) or 3 mg kg^?1 followed by a 2.6 mg kg^?1 hour^?1 CRI (T2). Post-treatment MAC determination (MAC_T) began 45 minutes after starting the CRI. Data were analyzed using a mixed model anova to determine the effect of treatment on percentage change in baseline MAC_SEVO (p < 0.05).ResultsThe MAC_B values were 1.80 ± 0.3 and 1.75 ± 0.2 for T1 and T2, respectively, and did not differ significantly. MAC_T decreased by 26 ± 8% for T1 and 36 ± 12% for T2. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the decrease between the two treatments.Conclusion and clinical relevanceTramadol significantly reduced MAC_SEVO but this was not dose dependent at the doses studied.     

Minimum end‐tidal sevoflurane concentration necessary to prevent movement during a constant rate infusion of morphine,or morphine plus dexmedetomidine in ponies

ObjectiveTo compare the effects of a constant rate infusion (CRI) of dexmedetomidine and morphine to those of morphine alone on the minimum end-tidal sevoflurane concentration necessary to prevent movement (MAC_NM) in ponies.Study designProspective, randomized, crossover, ‘blinded’, experimental study.AnimalsFive healthy adult gelding ponies were anaesthetized twice with a 3-week washout period.MethodsAfter induction of anaesthesia with sevoflurane in oxygen (via nasotracheal tube), the ponies were positioned on a surgical table (T0), and anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane (Fe‘SEVO 2.5%) in 55% oxygen. Monitoring included pulse oximetry, electrocardiography and measurement of anaesthetic gases, arterial blood pressure and body temperature. The ponies were mechanically ventilated and randomly allocated to receive IV treatment M [morphine 0.15 mg kg^?1 (T10-T15) followed by a CRI (0.1 mg kg^?1 hour^?1)] or treatment DM [dexmedetomidine 3.5 μg kg^?1 plus morphine 0.15 mg kg^?1 (T10-T15) followed by a CRI of dexmedetomidine 1.75 μg kg^?1 hour^?1 and morphine 0.1 mg kg^?1 hour^?1]. At T60, a stepwise MAC_NM determination was initiated using constant current electrical stimuli at the skin of the lateral pastern region. Triplicate MAC_NM estimations were obtained and then averaged in each pony. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to detect differences in MAC between treatments (a = 0.05).ResultsSevoflurane-morphine MAC_NM values (median (range) and mean ± SD) were 2.56 (2.01–4.07) and 2.79 ± 0.73%. The addition of a continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine significantly reduced sevoflurane MAC_NM values to 0.89 (0.62–1.05) and 0.89 ± 0.22% (mean MAC_NM reduction 67 ± 11%).Conclusion and clinical relevanceCo-administration of dexmedetomidine and morphine CRIs significantly reduced the MAC_NM of sevoflurane compared with a CRI of morphine alone at the reported doses.     

The effects of age, isoflurane and sevoflurane on atracurium in lambs

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of age, sevoflurane and isoflurane on atracurium-induced neuromuscular blockade in 3–16 week-old lambs.Study designProspective randomized experimental trial.AnimalsTwenty-six Scottish blackface ewe-lambs were anaesthetized for spinal surgery when either 3–6 (mean age 4.6 weeks; n = 18) or 12–16 weeks (mean age 13.7 weeks; n = 15) of age; seven animals were anaesthetized at both ages.MethodsAfter intramuscular injection of medetomidine (10 μg kg^?1) anaesthesia was induced in the younger lambs either with isoflurane or sevoflurane in oxygen delivered by mask, and in the older lambs with ketamine (4 mg kg^?1), and midazolam (0.2 mg kg^?1) administered intravenously (IV). In both groups anaesthesia was maintained with fixed end-tidal concentrations of either sevoflurane (2.8%) or isoflurane (1.8%) delivered in oxygen. Before surgery meloxicam (0.6 mg kg^?1), morphine (0.5 mg kg^?1) and ketamine (1 mg kg^?1 followed by 10 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) were administered IV. The lungs were ventilated mechanically to maintain normocapnia. Neuromuscular block was achieved with a loading dose (LD) of atracurium (0.5 mg kg^?1 IV). The peroneal nerve was stimulated (train-of-four every 12 seconds). Evoked responses in the digital extensor muscles were evaluated by palpation and observation. Maintenance doses (MD) of atracurium (0.17 mg kg^?1 IV) were administered when the first twitch (T1) returned. The onset and duration of LD action (T1 absent) and the duration of MD were recorded. Data were analysed using Student's t test, Mann–Whitney U test, repeated–measures anova, Wilcoxon's matched pairs test or Pearson correlation coefficient as relevant (p < 0.05).ResultsOnset of LD action developed significantly (p < 0.05) more rapidly in isoflurane compared with sevoflurane-anaesthetized lambs (55 ± 18 cf. 80 ± 37 seconds). Duration of action of LDs and MDs was longer (p < 0.05) in lambs aged 12–16 than 3–6 weeks (33 ± 5.4 cf. 25 ± 6.4 and 26 ± 4.2 cf. 18 ± 5.5 minutes) but were independent of the anaesthetic used.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe effect of atracurium is age-dependent in lambs being prolonged in older animals. The onset of neuromuscular blockade is more rapid in isoflurane compared with sevoflurane-anaesthetized lambs.     

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.     

Cardiopulmonary effects of butorphanol in sevoflurane‐anesthetized guineafowl (Numida meleagris)

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cardiopulmonary changes induced by intravenous butorphanol administration in guineafowl anesthetized with sevoflurane.Study designProspective experimental trial.AnimalsEight adult guineafowl (Numida meleagris) weighing 1.61 ± 0.49 kg were used for the study.MethodsBirds were anesthetized with sevoflurane and allowed to breathe spontaneously. After endotracheal intubation, end-tidal sevoflurane was adjusted to 1.0 individual sevoflurane MAC that was previously determined in triplicate using a standard bracketing technique. The brachial artery was catheterized for direct pressure measurement and blood sampling. Heart rate and rhythm were monitored by electrocardiography and respiratory rate was recorded. Baseline data were recorded 30 minutes after induction. Then, end-tidal sevoflurane was adjusted to 0.8 individual MAC and after 15 minutes physiologic variables were measured again. Subsequently, butorphanol (4 mg kg^?1) was administered intravenously over 10 seconds and physiologic responses were recorded at 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 and 45 minutes after administration.ResultsButorphanol administration was associated with arrhythmias in all birds, including second-degree atrioventricular block, sinus arrest, ventricular and supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular premature complexes. Heart rate and arterial blood pressures decreased significantly 1 minute after butorphanol administration. Two birds developed severe hypotension, apnea and ventricular fibrillation 5 minutes after administration, and one died.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe butorphanol dose (4 mg kg^?1) that produces clinically relevant sevoflurane MAC reduction in guineafowl caused severe adverse cardiopulmonary effects in two birds and was considered unsafe under the conditions used in this study.     

Effects of opioids and anesthetic drugs on body temperature in cats

ObjectiveTo determine which class of opioid alone or in conjunction with other anesthetic drugs causes post-anesthetic hyperthermia in cats.Study designProspective, randomized, crossover study.AnimalsEight adult, healthy, cats (four spayed females and four castrated males weighing 3.8 ± 0.6 kg).MethodsEach cat was instrumented with a wireless thermistor in the abdominal cavity. Temperature in all phases was recorded every 5 minutes for 5 hours. Population body temperature (PBT) was recorded for ～8 days. Baseline body temperature is the final 24 hours of the PBT. All injectable drugs were given intramuscularly. The cats were administered drugs in four phases: 1) hydromorphone (H) 0.05, 0.1, or 0.2 mg kg^?1; 2) morphine (M) (0.5 mg kg^?1), buprenorphine (BUP) (0.02 mg kg^?1), or butorphanol (BUT) (0.2 mg kg^?1); 3) ketamine (K) (5 mg kg^?1) or ketamine (5 mg kg^?1) plus hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^?1) (KH); 4) isoflurane in oxygen for 1 hour. Fifteen minutes prior to inhalant anesthetic, cats received either no premed (I), hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^?1) (IH), or hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^?1) plus ketamine (5 mg kg^?1) (IHK).ResultsMean PBT for all unmedicated cats was 38.9 ± 0.6 °C (102.0 ± 1 °F). The temperature of cats administered all doses of hydromorphone increased from baseline (p < 0.03) All four opioids (H, M, BUP and BUT) studied increased body temperature compared with baseline (p < 0.005). A significant difference was observed between baseline temperature values and those in treatment KH (p < 0.03). Following recovery from anesthesia, temperature in treatments IH and IHK was different from baseline (p < 0.002).Conclusions and clinical relevanceAll of the opioids tested, alone or in combination with ketamine or isoflurane, caused an increase in body temperature. The increase seen was mild to moderate (<40.1 °C (104.2 °F) and self limiting.     

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

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

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

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

Efficacy of maropitant in preventing vomiting in dogs premedicated with hydromorphone

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

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

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

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.     

Evaluation of the isoflurane‐sparing effects of fentanyl,lidocaine, ketamine,dexmedetomidine, or the combination lidocaine‐ketamine‐dexmedetomidine during ovariohysterectomy in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the isoflurane‐sparing effects of an intravenous (IV) constant rate infusion (CRI) of fentanyl, lidocaine, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, or lidocaine‐ketamine‐dexmedetomidine (LKD) in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designRandomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.AnimalsFifty four dogs.MethodsAnesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane with one of the following IV treatments: butorphanol/saline (butorphanol 0.4 mg kg^?1, saline 0.9% CRI, CONTROL/BUT); fentanyl (5 μg kg^?1, 10 μg kg^?1 hour^?1, FENT); ketamine (1 mg kg^?1, 40 μg kg^?1 minute^?1, KET), lidocaine (2 mg kg^?1, 100 μg kg^?1 minute^?1, LIDO); dexmedetomidine (1 μg kg^?1, 3 μg kg^?1 hour^?1, DEX); or a LKD combination. Positive pressure ventilation maintained eucapnia. An anesthetist unaware of treatment and end‐tidal isoflurane concentration (Fe′Iso) adjusted vaporizer settings to maintain surgical anesthetic depth. Cardiopulmonary variables and Fe′Iso concentrations were monitored. Data were analyzed using anova (p < 0.05).ResultsAt most time points, heart rate (HR) was lower in FENT than in other groups, except for DEX and LKD. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was lower in FENT and CONTROL/BUT than in DEX. Overall mean ± SD Fe′Iso and % reduced isoflurane requirements were 1.01 ± 0.31/41.6% (range, 0.75 ± 0.31/56.6% to 1.12 ± 0.80/35.3%, FENT), 1.37 ± 0.19/20.8% (1.23 ± 0.14/28.9% to 1.51 ± 0.22/12.7%, KET), 1.34 ± 0.19/22.5% (1.24 ± 0.19/28.3% to 1.44 ± 0.21/16.8%, LIDO), 1.30 ± 0.28/24.8% (1.16 ± 0.18/32.9% to 1.43 ± 0.32/17.3%, DEX), 0.95 ± 0.19/54.9% (0.7 ± 0.16/59.5% to 1.12 ± 0.16/35.3%, LKD) and 1.73 ± 0.18/0.0% (1.64 ± 0.21 to 1.82 ± 0.14, CONTROL/BUT) during surgery. FENT and LKD significantly reduced Fe′Iso.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAt the doses administered, FENT and LKD had greater isoflurane‐sparing effect than LIDO, KET or CONTROL/BUT, but not at all times. Low HR during FENT may limit improvement in MAP expected with reduced Fe′Iso.     

Combined effects of dexmedetomidine and vatinoxan infusions on minimum alveolar concentration and cardiopulmonary function in sevoflurane-anesthetized dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of combined infusions of vatinoxan and dexmedetomidine on inhalant anesthetic requirement and cardiopulmonary function in dogs.Study designProspective experimental study.MethodsA total of six Beagle dogs were anesthetized to determine sevoflurane minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) prior to and after an intravenous (IV) dose (loading, then continuous infusion) of dexmedetomidine (4.5 μg kg^–1 hour^–1) and after two IV doses of vatinoxan in sequence (90 and 180 μg kg^–1 hour^–1). Blood was collected for plasma dexmedetomidine and vatinoxan concentrations. During a separate anesthesia, cardiac output (CO) was measured under equivalent MAC conditions of sevoflurane and dexmedetomidine, and then with each added dose of vatinoxan. For each treatment, cardiovascular variables were measured with spontaneous and controlled ventilation. Repeated measures analyses were performed for each response variable; for all analyses, p < 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsDexmedetomidine reduced sevoflurane MAC by 67% (0.64 ± 0.1%), mean ± standard deviation in dogs. The addition of vatinoxan attenuated this to 57% (0.81 ± 0.1%) and 43% (1.1 ± 0.1%) with low and high doses, respectively, and caused a reduction in plasma dexmedetomidine concentrations. Heart rate and CO decreased while systemic vascular resistance increased with dexmedetomidine regardless of ventilation mode. The co-administration of vatinoxan dose-dependently modified these effects such that cardiovascular variables approached baseline.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIV infusions of 90 and 180 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 of vatinoxan combined with 4.5 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 dexmedetomidine provide a meaningful reduction in sevoflurane requirement in dogs. Although sevoflurane MAC-sparing properties of dexmedetomidine in dogs are attenuated by vatinoxan, the cardiovascular function is improved. Doses of vatinoxan >180 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 might improve cardiovascular function further in combination with this dose of dexmedetomidine, but beneficial effects on anesthesia plane and recovery quality may be lost.     

Safety, pharmacokinetics and use of the novel NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant (Cerenia) for the prevention of emesis and motion sickness in cats

The present study characterizes the safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-emetic effects of the selective NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant in the cat. Safety of maropitant was determined following 15 days of subcutaneous (SC) administration at 0.5–5 mg/kg. Maropitant was well tolerated in cats at doses that exceeded the efficacious anti-emetic dose range of the drug by at least a factor of 10 and adverse clinical signs or pathological safety findings were not noted at any dose.The pharmacokinetics of maropitant in cats were determined following single dose oral (PO), intravenous (IV) and SC administration. Maropitant had a terminal half-life of 13–17 h and a bioavailability of 50 and 117% when administered PO and SC, respectively. Efficacy was determined against emesis induced either by xylazine or by motion. A dosage of 1 mg/kg maropitant administered IV, SC or PO prevented emesis elicited by xylazine. The compound had good oral antiemetic activity and a long (24 h) duration of action. Maropitant (1.0 mg/kg) was highly effective in preventing motion-induced emesis in cats. These studies indicate that the NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant is well tolerated, safe and has excellent anti-emetic properties in cats.     

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

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