Administration of acepromazine maleate to 31 dogs with a history of seizures

Objective: To retrospectively evaluate the incidence of seizures in dogs presenting with a history of seizures that were treated with acepromazine (ACE) during hospitalization. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Privately owned emergency and referral hospital. Animals: Thirty‐one client‐owned dogs. Interventions: Administration of ACE. Measurements and main results: The medical records from dogs with an acute or chronic seizure history that received ACE were reviewed. Factors evaluated included presenting complaint, seizure history, ACE dosage, duration of observation, seizure activity, and other medications used. Thirty‐one dogs qualified for the study: 20 males and 11 females. Age range was 3 months to 14.9 years. Presenting complaint was seizure in 28/31 dogs. There was a prior history of seizures in 22/31 dogs, and 15/22 were currently on antiseizure medication. ACE was given 1–5 times per dog. Mean ACE dose was 0.029 mg/kg IV (range: 0.008–0.057 mg/kg; n=46), 0.036 mg/kg IM (range: 0.017–0.059 mg/kg; n=14), 0.53 mg/kg PO (n=2). Twenty‐seven dogs did not seizure after administration of ACE within the observation period (mean: 16.4 hours, range: 0.25–66 hours). Twenty‐five dogs received antiseizure medication before ACE. Eight seizure episodes occurred in 4 dogs (all of whom presented for seizures) within 0.3–10 hours after ACE administration. Conclusions: There was no observed correlation between ACE administration in dogs with a seizure history and the recurrence of seizure activity during hospitalization. The time from ACE administration to seizure activity was greater than expected for measurable effects to be seen in 1 dog (10 hour). Further studies with a larger group and alternative ACE doses are needed to more thoroughly evaluate the safety of short‐term ACE use in dogs with a seizure history.     

Effects of methadone, alone or in combination with acepromazine or xylazine, on sedation and physiologic values in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of methadone, administered alone or in combination with acepromazine or xylazine, on sedation and on physiologic values in dogs.Study designRandomized cross-over design.AnimalsSix adult healthy mixed-breed dogs weighing 13.5 ± 4.9 kg.MethodsDogs were injected intramuscularly with physiologic saline (Control), or methadone (0.5mg kg⁻¹) or acepromazine (0.1 mg kg⁻¹) or xylazine (1.0 mg kg⁻¹), or acepromazine (0.05 mg kg⁻¹) plus methadone (0.5 mg kg⁻¹) or xylazine (0.5 mg kg⁻¹) plus methadone (0.5 mg kg⁻¹) in a randomized cross-over design, with at least 1-week intervals. Sedation, pulse rate, indirect systolic arterial pressure, respiratory rate (RR), body temperature and pedal withdrawal reflex were evaluated before and at 15-minute intervals for 90 minutes after treatment.ResultsSedation was greater in dogs receiving xylazine alone, xylazine plus methadone and acepromazine plus methadone. Peak sedative effect occurred within 30 minutes of treatment administration. Pulse rate was lower in dogs that received xylazine either alone or with methadone during most of the study. Systolic arterial pressure decreased only in dogs receiving acepromazine alone. When methadone was administered alone, RR was higher than in other treatments during most of the study and a high prevalence of panting was observed. In all treatments body temperature decreased, this effect being more pronounced in dogs receiving methadone alone or in combination with acepromazine. Pedal withdrawal reflex was absent in four dogs receiving methadone plus xylazine but not in any dog in the remaining treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMethadone alone produces mild sedation and a high prevalence of panting. Greater sedation was achieved when methadone was used in combination with acepromazine or xylazine. The combination xylazine–methadone appears to result in better analgesia than xylazine administered alone. Both combinations of methadone/sedative were considered effective for premedication in dogs.     

Effects of acepromazine on the incidence of vomiting associated with opioid administration in dogs

Objective To evaluate the anti‐emetic properties of acepromazine in dogs receiving opioids as pre‐anesthetic medication. Study design Randomized prospective clinical study. Animals One hundred and sixteen dogs (ASA I or II), admitted for elective surgical procedures. The dogs were a mixed population of males and females, purebreds and mixed breeds, 0.25–13.4 years of age, weighing 1.8–57.7 kg. Methods A prospective clinical trial in which the dogs were randomly assigned to one of three groups. All groups received acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1 intramuscularly (IM)). Group I received acepromazine 15 minutes prior to opioid administration. Group II received acepromazine in combination with the opioid. Group III received acepromazine 15 minutes after opioid administration. One of three different opioids was administered IM to each dog: morphine sulfate at 0.5 mg kg^?1; hydromorphone hydrochloride at 0.1 mg kg^?1; or oxymorphone hydrochloride at 0.075 mg kg^?1. Results Dogs receiving acepromazine before the opioid (group I) had a significantly lower incidence of vomiting (18%) than dogs in groups II (45%) and III (55%). The degree of sedation was significantly lower in the dogs receiving the combination of acepromazine and the opioid (group II) than in dogs receiving the opioid as the first drug (group III). Conclusions and clinical relevance Acepromazine administered 15 minutes before the opioid lowers the incidence of vomiting induced by opioids.     

Comparative study on the sedative effects of morphine, methadone, butorphanol or tramadol, in combination with acepromazine, in dogs

Objective  To compare the effects of morphine (MOR), methadone (MET), butorphanol (BUT) and tramadol (TRA), in combination with acepromazine, on sedation, cardiorespiratory variables, body temperature and incidence of emesis in dogs.
Study design  Prospective randomized, blinded, experimental trial.
Animals  Six adult mixed-breed male dogs weighing 12.0 ± 4.3 kg.
Methods  Dogs received intravenous administration (IV) of acepromazine (0.05 mg kg⁻¹) and 15 minutes later, one of four opioids was randomly administered IV in a cross-over design, with at least 1-week intervals. Dogs then received MOR 0.5 mg kg⁻¹; MET 0.5 mg kg⁻¹; BUT 0.15 mg kg⁻¹; or TRA 2.0 mg kg⁻¹. Indirect systolic arterial pressure (SAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate ( f _R), rectal temperature, pedal withdrawal reflex and sedation were evaluated at regular intervals for 90 minutes.
Results  Acepromazine administration decreased SAP, HR and temperature and produced mild sedation. All opioids further decreased temperature and MOR, BUT and TRA were associated with further decreases in HR. Tramadol decreased SAP whereas BUT decreased f _R compared with values before opioid administration. Retching was observed in five of six dogs and vomiting occurred in one dog in MOR, but not in any dog in the remaining treatments. Sedation scores were greater in MET followed by MOR and BUT. Tramadol was associated with minor changes in sedation produced by acepromazine alone.
Conclusions and clinical relevance  When used with acepromazine, MET appears to provide better sedation than MOR, BUT and TRA. If vomiting is to be avoided, MET, BUT and TRA may be better options than MOR.     

Effects of acepromazine on renal function in anesthetized dogs

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of IM administration of acepromazine on indices of relative renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) by means of scintigraphy, as well as the effects on physiologic, hematologic, and serum biochemical variables in anesthetized dogs, compared with effects of administration of saline. ANIMAL: 6 healthy Beagles. PROCEDURE: Acepromazine (0.1 mg/kg) or physiologic saline (0.9 NaCI) solution was administered IM 30 minutes prior to induction of anesthesia with thiopentone; anesthesia was maintained with inspired isoflurane for 2.25 hours. Blood gases and circulatory and ventilatory variables were monitored. Renal function was evaluated by scintigraphic measurements of GFR and relative renal blood flow and analyses of serum and urine. Statistical analyses used ANOVA or Friedman ANOVA. RESULTS: Values of relative renal blood flow and GFR remained high despite low blood pressures. After administration of acepromazine, mean +/- SD arterial blood pressure was 66 +/- 8 mm Hg during anesthesia; this value was below the threshold (80 mm Hg) for renal autoregulation of GFR. In comparison, mean arterial blood pressure after administration of saline was significantly higher (87 +/- 13 mm Hg). However, between treatments, there were no significant differences in GFR, relative renal blood flow, or other indices of renal function. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Measurements of renal function and blood flow in dogs during anesthesia with thiopentone and isoflurane did not differ significantly between treatments, which suggested that acepromazine protects renal function despite inducing reduction in blood pressure, compared with effects of administration of saline.     

Comparison of intraocular pressure and pupil diameter after sedation with either acepromazine or dexmedetomidine in healthy dogs

Objective

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) and pupillary diameter (PD) following intravenous (IV) administration of dexmedetomidine and acepromazine in dogs.

Alfaxalone for total intravenous anaesthesia in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy: a comparison of premedication with acepromazine or dexmedetomidine

ObjectiveTo describe alfaxalone total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) following premedication with buprenorphine and either acepromazine (ACP) or dexmedetomidine (DEX) in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designProspective, randomised, clinical study.AnimalsThirty-eight healthy female dogs.MethodsFollowing intramuscular buprenorphine (20 μg kg^?1) and acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) or dexmedetomidine (approximately 10 μg kg^?1, adjusted for body surface area), anaesthesia was induced and maintained with intravenous alfaxalone. Oxygen was administered via a suitable anaesthetic circuit. Alfaxalone infusion rate (initially 0.07 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) was adjusted to maintain adequate anaesthetic depth based on clinical assessment. Alfaxalone boluses were given if required. Ventilation was assisted if necessary. Alfaxalone dose and physiologic parameters were recorded every 5 minutes. Depth of sedation after premedication, induction quality and recovery duration and quality were scored. A Student's t-test, Mann–Whitney U and Chi-squared tests determined the significance of differences between groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD or median (range). Significance was defined as p < 0.05.ResultsThere were no differences between groups in demographics; induction quality; induction (1.5 ± 0.57 mg kg^?1) and total bolus doses [1.2 (0 – 6.3) mg kg^?1] of alfaxalone; anaesthesia duration (131 ± 18 minutes); or time to extubation [16.6 (3–50) minutes]. DEX dogs were more sedated than ACP dogs. Alfaxalone infusion rate was significantly lower in DEX [0.08 (0.06–0.19) mg kg^?1 minute^?1] than ACP dogs [0.11 (0.07–0.33) mg kg^?1 minute^?1]. Cardiovascular variables increased significantly during ovarian and cervical ligation and wound closure compared to baseline values in both groups. Apnoea and hypoventilation were common and not significantly different between groups. Arterial haemoglobin oxygen saturation remained above 95% in all animals. Recovery quality scores were significantly poorer for DEX than for ACP dogs.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone TIVA is an effective anaesthetic for surgical procedures but, in the protocol of this study, causes respiratory depression at infusion rates required for surgery.     

Comparison of the effects of methadone and butorphanol combined with acepromazine for canine gastroduodenoscopy

ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility of gastroduodenoscopy in dogs premedicated with acepromazine in combination with butorphanol or methadone.Study designProspective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial.AnimalsA group of 40 client-owned dogs.MethodsDogs were randomly allocated to one of two groups and give intramuscular acepromazine 0.02 mg kg^–1 combined with either butorphanol 0.3 mg kg^–1 (group ACEBUT) or methadone 0.2 mg kg^–1 (group ACEMET). General anaesthesia was induced with propofol and ketamine and maintained with sevoflurane (2.3%) in oxygen. Cardiopulmonary variables were recorded at 5 minute intervals during anaesthesia. Feasibility of the entire gastroduodenoscopy was evaluated with a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) (primary outcome of the study). Lower oesophageal sphincter dilatation and duodenal intubation were scored. Pylorus diameter was measured with standard endoscopic inflatable balloons. Overall cardiovascular stability was assessed during anaesthesia, using a VAS (0-100), as was the presence of fluid in the oesophagus, regurgitation, need for mechanical ventilation, and intraoperative and postoperative rescue analgesia (secondary outcomes of the study). Differences between treatments were analysed with Mann–Whitney U, Student t test, Fisher exact test or mixed model analysis of variance as appropriate. Subsequently, feasibility VAS of the gastroduodenoscopy was assessed for noninferiority between groups. The noninferiority margin was set as –10.ResultsAll gastroduodenoscopies were successfully completed in both groups using an endoscope tip diameter of 12.8 mm in all but one dog. Feasibility of gastroduodenoscopy was evaluated as 2.9 ± 5.6 in group ACEBUT and 5.1 ± 5.8 in group ACEMET. No significant differences between groups were detected in any measured or assessed variables, and noninferiority was confirmed.Conclusion and clinical relevanceIn our study population, the effects of methadone and butorphanol when combined with acepromazine were comparable.     

The impact of acepromazine on the efficacy of crystalloid,dextran or ephedrine treatment in hypotensive dogs under isoflurane anesthesia

ObjectiveTo determine the impact of acepromazine on the cardiovascular responses to three treatments for hypotension in dogs during deep isoflurane anesthesia.Study designProspective blinded randomized cross-over experimental design.AnimalsSix adult (2.5 ± 0.5 year old) healthy mixed breed dogs (24.2 ± 7.6 kg).MethodsAnesthesia was induced with propofol (4–6 mg kg^?1, IV) and maintained with isoflurane. Each dog received six treatments separated by at least 5 days. Once instrumented, dogs randomly received acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) (Ace) or saline (equal volume) (Sal) IV and end-tidal isoflurane (e′Iso) was adjusted to achieve hypotension, defined as a mean blood pressure between 45 and 50 mmHg. Dogs randomly received dextran (D) (7 mL kg^?1) or lactated Ringer's (LR) (20 mL kg^?1) over 14 minutes, or ephedrine (Eph) (0.1 mg kg^?1 followed by 10 μg kg^?1 minute^?1) throughout the study. Measurements were taken at baseline, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, and 40 minutes. Data were analyzed with a Latin Square in two factors (Ace/Sal and treatment) for repeated measures, with further comparisons if appropriate (p < 0.05).Resultse′Iso producing hypotension was significantly less following Ace (2.07 ± 0.23%) than Sal (2.43 ± 0.23%). No improvement in cardiac output (CO) was observed with D or LR. LR initially intensified hypotension with a significant reduction in SVR, while D caused a minor improvement in ABP. Eph produced a significant increase in ABP, CO, hemoglobin, oxygen content and delivery. Pre-treatment with Ace minimized ABP improvements with all treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAcepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1 IV) enhanced the hypotensive effect of isoflurane, although it maintained CO. Administration of LR significantly worsens ABP initially by further vasodilation. D caused minimal improvement in ABP. At the infusion studied, Eph effectively countered the cardiovascular depression produced by deep isoflurane anesthesia, but extremes in ABP associated with initial vasoconstriction prevent our recommendation at this dose.     

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

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

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.     

Hematological and splenic Doppler ultrasonographic changes in dogs sedated with acepromazine or xylazine

Objective

To evaluate the onset and duration of hematological changes and the use of Doppler ultrasound (spleen) in dogs sedated with acepromazine or xylazine.

Postinduction apnoea in dogs premedicated with acepromazine or dexmedetomidine and anaesthetized with alfaxalone or propofol

Objective

To compare incidence and duration of postinduction apnoea in dogs after premedication with methadone and acepromazine (MA) or methadone and dexmedetomidine (MD) followed by induction with propofol (P) or alfaxalone (A).

Effects of acepromazine on pulmonary gas exchange and circulation during sedation and dissociative anaesthesia in horses

OBJECTIVE: To study pulmonary gas exchange and cardiovascular responses to sedation achieved with romifidine and butorphanol (RB) alone, or combined with acepromazine, and during subsequent tiletamine-zolazepam anaesthesia in horses. ANIMALS: Six (four males and two females) healthy Standardbred trotters aged 3-12 years; mass 423-520 kg. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, cross-over, experimental study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Horses were anaesthetized on two occasions (with a minimum interval of 1 week) with intravenous (IV) tiletamine-zolazepam (Z; 1.4 mg kg(-1)) after pre-anaesthetic medication with IV romifidine (R; 0.1 mg kg(-1)) and butorphanol (B; 25 microg kg(-1) IV). At the first trial, horses were randomly allocated to receive (protocol ARBZ) or not to receive (protocol RBZ) acepromazine (A; 35 microg kg(-1)) intramuscularly (IM) 35 minutes before induction of anaesthesia. Each horse was placed in left lateral recumbency and, after tracheal intubation, allowed to breathe room air spontaneously. Respiratory and haemodynamic variables and ventilation-perfusion (; multiple inert gas elimination technique) ratios were determined in the conscious horse, after sedation and during anaesthesia. One- and two-way repeated-measures anova were used to identify within- and between-technique differences, respectively. RESULTS: During sedation with RB, arterial oxygen tension (PaO(2)) decreased compared to baseline and increased mismatch was evident; there was no O(2) diffusion limitation or increase in intrapulmonary shunt fraction identified. With ARB, PaO(2) and remained unaffected. During anaesthesia, intrapulmonary shunt occurred to the same extent in both protocols, and mismatching increased. This was less in the ARBZ group. Arterial O(2) tension decreased in both protocols, but was lower at 25 and 35 minutes of anaesthesia in RBZ than in ARBZ. During sedation, heart rate (HR) and cardiac output (Qt) were lower while arterial-mixed venous oxygen content differences and haemoglobin concentrations were higher in RBZ compared with ARBZ. Total systemic vascular resistance, mean systemic, and mean pulmonary arterial pressures were higher during anaesthesia with RBZ compared to ARBZ. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Acepromazine added to RB generally improved haemodynamic variables and arterial oxygenation during sedation and anaesthesia. Arterial oxygenation was impaired as a result of increased shunt and mismatch during anaesthesia, although acepromazine treatment reduced disturbances and falls in PaO(2) to some extent. Haemodynamic variables were closer to baseline during sedation and anaesthesia when horses received acepromazine. Acepromazine may confer advantages in healthy normovolaemic horses.     

Modulation of nociceptive withdrawal reflexes evoked by single and repeated nociceptive stimuli in conscious dogs by low-dose acepromazine

ObjectivesTo investigate the modulation of the nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR) and temporal summation (TS) by low‐dose acepromazine (ACP) in conscious dogs. To assess the short‐ and long‐term stability of the reflex thresholds.Study designRandomized, blinded, placebo‐controlled cross‐over experimental study.AnimalsEight adult male Beagles.MethodsThe NWR was elicited using single transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the ulnar nerve. Repeated stimuli (10 pulses, 5 Hz) were applied to evoke TS. The responses of the deltoideus muscle were recorded and quantified by surface electromyography and the behavioural reactions were scored. Each dog received 0.01 mg kg^?1 ACP or an equal volume saline intravenously (IV) at 1 week intervals. Measurements were performed before (baseline) and 20, 60 and 100 minutes after drug administration. Sedation was scored before drug administration and then at 10 minutes intervals. Data were analyzed with Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance on ranks and Wilcoxon signed rank tests.ResultsAcepromazine resulted in a mild tranquilization becoming obvious at 20 minutes and peaking 30 minutes after injection. Single (I_t) and repeated stimuli (TS_t) threshold intensities, NWR and TS characteristics and behavioural responses were not affected by the ACP at any time point. Both I_t and TS_t were stable over time.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIn dogs, 0.01 mg kg^?1 ACP IV had no modulatory action on the NWR evoked by single or repeated stimuli, suggesting no antinociceptive activity on phasic nociceptive stimuli. The evidence of the stability of the NWR thresholds supports the use of the model as an objective tool to investigate nociception in conscious dogs. A low dose of ACP administered as the sole drug, can be used to facilitate the recordings in anxious subjects without altering the validity of this model.     

Effects of ketamine‐diazepam and ketamine‐acepromazine combinations on intraocular pressure in rabbits

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of ketamine-diazepam and ketamine-acepromazine combinations on intraocular pressure (IOP) in rabbits.Study designRandomized clinical trial.AnimalsSixteen adult New Zealand white rabbits approximately one year old, weighing 2.3 ± 0.2 kg were used in this study.MethodsThe animals were randomly divided into two groups of eight each (KA and KD). The pre-treatment IOPs were recorded in both groups (T0). All rabbits in group KA received intramuscular ketamine-acepromazine (ketamine 30 mg kg^?1+ acepromazine 0.5 mg kg^?1). Ketamine-diazepam (ketamine 30 mg kg^?1 + diazepam 1 mg kg^?1) was administered intramuscularly in members of group KD. The IOP values were measured at 5 (T₅), 15 (T₁₅), and 20 (T₂₀) minutes after drug administration in both treatment groups.ResultsSignificant increases in IOP values were observed in both treatment groups at T_5, T₁₅, and T₂₀ in comparison to the baseline values. In group KA the mean ± SD IOP at T_5, T₁₅, and T₂₀ were 37 ± 13 (p < 0.001), 35 ± 4 (p < 0.001) and 34 ± 4 mmHg (p < 0.001). The post-treatment mean ± sd values in group KD were 23 ± 8 (p = 0.002), 23 ± 5 (p < 0.001) and 23 ± 6 mmHg (p = 0.001) at 5, 15, and 20 minutes respectively.Conclusion and clinical relevanceBoth ketamine-diazepam and ketamine-acepromazine combinations increased IOP after intramuscular administration in rabbits.     

Two doses of dexmedetomidine in combination with buprenorphine for premedication in dogs; a comparison with acepromazine and buprenorphine

ObjectiveTo assess as premedicants, the sedative, cardiorespiratory and propofol-sparing effects in dogs of dexmedetomidine and buprenorphine compared to acepromazine and buprenorphine.Study designProspective, randomised, blinded clinical studyAnimalsSixty healthy dogs (ASA grades I/II). Mean (SD) body mass 28.0 ± 9.1 kg, and mean age 3.4 ± 2.3 years.MethodsDogs were allocated randomly to receive 15 μg kg^?1 buprenorphine combined with either 30 μg kg^?1 acepromazine (group 1), 62.5 μg m^?2 dexmedetomidine (group 2), or 125 μg m^?2 dexmedetomidine (group 3) intramuscularly. After 30 minutes, anaesthesia was induced using a propofol target controlled infusion. Heart rate, respiratory rate, and oscillometric arterial blood pressure were recorded prior to induction, at endotracheal intubation and at 3 and 5 minutes post-intubation. Induction quality and pre-induction sedation were scored on 4 point scales. Propofol target required for endotracheal intubation was recorded. Data were analysed using Chi-squared tests, Kruskal-Wallis, one way and general linear model anova (p < 0.05).ResultsAge was significantly lower in group 1 (1.0 (1.0–3.8) years) than group 2 (5.0 (2.0–7.0) years), (median, (IQR)). There were no significant differences in sedation or quality of induction between groups. After premedication, heart rate was significantly lower and arterial blood pressures higher in groups 2 and 3 than group 1, but there was no significant difference between groups 2 and 3. Propofol targets were significantly lower in group 3 (1.5 (1.0–2.5) μg mL^?1) than group 1 (2.5 (2.0–3.0) μg mL^?1); no significant differences existed between group 2 (2.0 (1.5–2.5) μg mL^?1) and the other groups (median, (interquartile range)).Conclusions and Clinical relevanceWhen administered with buprenorphine, at these doses, dexmedetomidine had no advantages in terms of sedation and induction quality over acepromazine. Both doses of dexmedetomidine produced characteristic cardiovascular and respiratory effects of a similar magnitude.