A comparison of preoperative tramadol and morphine for the control of early postoperative pain in canine ovariohysterectomy

Objective To compare morphine with tramadol for the management of early postoperative pain following ovariohysterectomy after pyometra in dogs. Study design Prospective randomized blinded clinical trial. Animals Thirty female dogs, 2–14 years old. Methods Animals were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group 1 received 0.2 mg kg^?1 of morphine IV and group 2 received 2 mg kg^?1 of tramadol IV after the induction of anesthesia. The dogs were premedicated with acepromazine, and anesthesia was induced with intravenous midazolam and ketamine. Isoflurane was used for the maintenance of anesthesia. The variables measured were: analgesia; sedation; cardiac and respiratory rates; arterial blood pressure; end‐tidal isoflurane and carbon dioxide (Pe ′CO₂); oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO₂); plasma catecholamines; serum cortisol and glucose concentrations; pH and blood gases. The animals were monitored for 6 hours after the administration of the analgesic agent. Results There were no differences between the two groups with regard to analgesia, sedation, SpO₂, pH and blood gases, cardiovascular variables, glucose, catecholamine and cortisol concentrations. Forty minutes postopioid administration, the end‐tidal isoflurane concentration was significantly lower in the morphine‐treated group as compared to the tramadol group. At 30 minutes following opioid injection, Pe ′CO₂ was significantly higher in the morphine group than in the tramadol group. Two dogs in the tramadol group and one in the morphine group were given morphine postoperatively because of increasing pain scores. Conclusion and clinical relevance Morphine and tramadol, administered preemptively can be used safely in dogs to control early pain after ovariohysterectomy without significant adverse effects.     

A preliminary investigation comparing pre-operative morphine and buprenorphine for postoperative analgesia and sedation in cats

Objective To compare the postoperative analgesic and sedative properties of buprenorphine and morphine in cats. Study Design Prospective, randomized, blinded study. Animals Thirty‐two domestic cats undergoing surgery. Methods Cats received pre‐anaesthetic medication with acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1) given intramuscularly and were randomly allocated to group M and given morphine (0.1 mg kg^?1) intramuscularly (IM) or to group B and given buprenorphine (0.01 mg kg^?1) IM. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with halothane in oxygen and nitrous oxide. Pain and sedation scores using visual analogue scales, and heart and respiratory rates, were measured immediately before, and 30, 60, 120, 180, 300 and 420 minutes after anaesthesia. Results Pain scores were significantly lower at 60, 120 and 180 minutes after anaesthesia in group B. Group B also had higher heart rates at 30 minutes. There were no other statistically significant differences between the groups. Clinical relevance Buprenorphine (0.01 mg kg^?1) appeared to provide better postoperative analgesia than morphine (0.1 mg kg^?1) and may also have a longer duration of action.     

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.     

Glomerular filtration rate after tramadol, parecoxib and pindolol following anaesthesia and analgesia in comparison with morphine in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the effects of morphine, parecoxib, tramadol and a combination of parecoxib, tramadol and pindolol on nociceptive thresholds in awake animals and their effect on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in dogs subjected to 30 minutes of anesthesia.AnimalsEight adult mixed breed experimental dogs.Study designRandomized, controlled trial.MethodsDogs received 0.05 mg kg^?1 acepromazine subcutaneously (SC) as anaesthetic pre-medication. Thirty to sixty minutes later, they received either tramadol 3 mg kg^?1 intravenously, (IV), parecoxib (1 mg kg^?1 IV), a combination of tramadol 3 mg kg^?1 (IV), parecoxib 1 mg kg^?1 (IV) and pindolol 5 μg kg^?1 (SC), morphine (0.1 mg kg^?1 (IV) or 0.9% saline (2 mL). Anaesthesia was then induced with IV propofol to effect (2.9 ± 0.8 mg kg^?1) and maintained with halothane in oxygen for 30 minutes. Systolic arterial blood pressure was maintained above 90 mmHg with IV fluids and by adjusting the inspired halothane concentration. Post-treatment nociceptive thresholds to mechanical stimuli, expressed as percent of pre-treatment values, were compared between the treatments to assess the analgesic efficacy of the drugs. Plasma iohexol clearance (ICL), a measure of GFR, was estimated both before and 24 hours after induction of anaesthesia to study the drugs’ effects on renal perfusion. Nociceptive threshold and GFR data were compared using mixed model analysis in sas^®9.1.ResultsBoth tramadol and parecoxib produced similar analgesia, which was less than that of morphine. Their combination with pindolol produced analgesia comparable with morphine. None of the test drugs, either alone or in combination, reduced GFR.ConclusionTramadol and parecoxib (either alone or in combination) can increase nociceptive thresholds in awake dogs and have minimal effects on renal perfusion in normotensive dogs subjected to anaesthesia.     

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

Opioids used in the pre‐operative period may frequently induce vomiting. Acepromazine is commonly combined with opioids as a pre‐anesthetic drug, and has antiemetic properties. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the antiemetic properties of acepromazine in dogs receiving opioids as a pre‐anesthetic. One hundred and sixteen dogs (ASA I or II), 58 males and 58 females; purebreds and mixed breeds; 3 months?13.4 years of age; weighing 1.8–57.7 kg admitted for elective surgical procedures, were randomly assigned to one of the three groups. All groups received acepromazine (0.05 mg kg^?1 IM). Group I (n = 40) received acepromazine 15 minutes prior to opioid administration. Group II (n = 38) received acepromazine in combination with the opioid. Group III (n = 38) received acepromazine 15 minutes after opioid administration. One of the three different opioids was administered IM to each dog: morphine at 0.5 mg kg^?1, hydromorphone at 0.1 mg kg^?1, or oxymorphone at 0.075 mg kg^?1. Statistical analysis included a χ²‐test for the incidence of vomiting and a Kruskal–Wallis nonparametric test for the sedation comparison between groups. The dogs receiving acepromazine before the opioid (Group I) had significantly lower incidence of vomiting (18%) than those in Groups II (45%) and III (55%). The degree of sedation assessed 15 minutes after administration of the last drug (s) in each group was significantly lower in the dogs receiving the combination of acepromazine and opioid (Group II) than in those receiving opioid as the first drug (Group III). Time to vomiting was less than 8 minutes in all groups. In conclusion, acepromazine administered 15 minutes before opioid reduces the incidence of vomiting induced by opioids.     

Sedative effects of hydromorphone or oxymorphone with or without acepromazine in dogs

Hydromorphone is an agonist opioid with potency approximately five times that of morphine and half that of oxymorphone. The purpose of this study was to compare hydromorphone with oxymorphone, with or without acepromazine, for sedation in dogs, and to measure plasma histamine before and after drug administration. Ten dogs received IM hydromorphone (H; 0.2 mg kg^?1), oxymorphone (O; 0.1 mg kg^?1), hydromorphone with acepromazine (H; 0.2 mg kg^?1, A; 0.05 mg kg^?1) or oxymorphone with acepromazine (O; 0.1 mg kg^?1, A; 0.05 mg kg^?1) in a randomized Latin‐square design. Sedation score, heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and SpO₂ were recorded at baseline and every 5 minutes after drug administration up to 25 minutes. Plasma histamine was measured at baseline and at 25 minutes post‐drug administration. Data were analyzed with repeated measures anova . Mean ± SD body weight was 21.62 ± 1.54 kg. Mean ± SD age was 1.07 ± 0.19 years. Sedation score was significantly greater for OA after 5 minutes than O alone (4.1 ± 3.5 versus 1.9 ± 1.5) and for HA after 15 minutes than H alone (8.6 ± 2.9 versus 5.9 ± 2.5). There was no significant difference in sedation between H and O at any time point. There was no significant difference between groups at any time with respect to heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure or SpO₂. Mean ± SD plasma histamine (nM ml^?1) for all groups was 1.72 ± 2.69 at baseline and 1.13 ± 1.18 at 25 minutes. There was no significant change in plasma histamine concentration in any group. Hydromorphone is effective for sedation in dogs and does not cause measurable increase in histamine. Sedation with hydromorphone is enhanced by acepromazine.     

The effect of anesthesia and surgery on heart rate variability in dogs

Heart rate variability (HRV) may be useful for objective assessment of stress and pain in animals. The objective of this study was to describe the effect of anesthesia and surgery on HRV in dogs. We hypothesized that surgery would decrease HRV to a greater degree and for a longer duration than anesthesia alone. Four healthy male dogs (29 ± 2 kg) were instrumented for ambulatory ECG monitoring. Continuous ECG data was obtained for 1 day prior to, and 6 days following anesthesia alone (ANES) or anesthesia plus unilateral stifle arthrotomy (ANSX). The anesthetic protocol included xylazine (0.5 mg kg^–1 IM), morphine (0.5 mg kg^–1 IM), atropine (0.04 mg kg^–1 IM), thiopental (10 mg kg^–1 IV) and isoflurane in oxygen. A single dose of morphine (0.5 mg kg^–1 IM) was administered at extubation. Time domain analysis of HRV was performed on 5 minutes epochs of artefact‐ and arrhythmia‐free ECG data obtained at 12 noon and 12 midnight on each of the seven experimental days. Mean RR interval, standard deviation of normal R‐R intervals (SDNN), and the standard deviation of successive differences in RR intervals (SDSD) were compared to baseline for ANES and ANSX. Pain scores obtained during the day were also evaluated. Significance was set at p < 0.01. There were no differences between groups for any baseline data. Mean RR interval did not differ from baseline on days 1–6 in ANES or ANSX. SDNN and SDSD values at noon were not different from baseline on days 1–6 in ANES or ANSX. At midnight on days 1 and 2, SDNN was significantly decreased from baseline in ANSX, and on day 1 a significant difference between groups existed. ANSX values of SDSD at midnight were significantly decreased from baseline and ANES on day 1. Pain scores for ANSX were significantly greater than baseline on days 1–3, and different from ANES on days 1–5. These results suggest that HRV is decreased following anesthesia plus surgery, and that changes in HRV may be associated with pain.     

A comparison of epidural buprenorphine with epidural morphine for postoperative analgesia following stifle surgery in dogs

Objective To compare the efficacy of epidural buprenorphine with epidural morphine for post‐operative pain relief in dogs undergoing cranial cruciate ligament rupture repair. Study design A randomized, double blind clinical trial. Animals Twenty client‐owned dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Methods Dogs were randomly assigned to receive either epidural buprenorphine (4 µg kg^?1) or epidural morphine (0.1 mg kg^?1) in a total volume of 0.2 mL kg^?1. Epidural injections were performed immediately after induction of anesthesia. End‐tidal halothane and CO₂ were recorded every 15 minutes from the time of epidural administration of drug to extubation. A numerical rating pain score system was used by a blinded observer to evaluate analgesia beginning at extubation and continuing at specific intervals for 24 hours after surgery. Heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood pressure were recorded noninvasively at the same times. If pain score indicated moderate discomfort, rescue morphine at 1.0 mg kg^?1 was administered intramuscularly. Results There were no significant differences between groups with respect to pain score, heart rate, respiratory rate, indirect blood pressure, end‐tidal halothane or end‐tidal CO₂ at any time point. Fifty percent of dogs in the buprenorphine group and 50% of dogs in the morphine group required rescue analgesic medication. Time of systemic rescue morphine administration did not differ significantly between the two groups. There were no clinically observable side‐effects from epidural administration of either drug in any of the dogs of this study. Conclusions Epidural buprenorphine is as effective as epidural morphine for the relief of postoperative hindlimb orthopedic pain in dogs. Clinical relevance Buprenorphine appears to be an effective opioid for epidural use in healthy dogs. Buprenorphine may offer certain advantages over morphine for epidural use, such as lower abuse potential and, in some clinics, reduced cost and less wastage of drug.     

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

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

Effect of pre-medication on gastroduodenoscopy in isoflurane-anesthetized cats

The pre‐medicant chosen may influence the ease with which gastroduodenoscopy (GD) is performed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative ease of GD in cats under ketamine and isoflurane anesthesia after IM injection of hydromorphone (H, 0.1 mg kg^?1), hydromorphone plus glycopyrrolate (HG, 0.1 mg kg^?1 (H), 0.01 mg kg^?1 (G)), medetomidine (M, 0.03 mg kg^?1), or butorphanol (B, 0.4 mg kg^?1). Eight cats were assigned randomly to receive each treatment in a cross‐over design with at least 7 days between treatments. Twenty minutes after pre‐medication, medetomidine produced greater (p = 0.001) sedation than the other treatments when assessed, using a subjective ordinal scale. The cats were injected with ketamine (10 mg kg^?1 IM), orotracheally intubated, connected to a pediatric circle breathing system, and allowed to spontaneously breathe isoflurane in oxygen. Once end‐tidal isoflurane concentration was stable at 1.4% for 15 minutes, endoscopy was started. A single endoscopist (REG), who was unaware of the treatment used, performed all endoscopies. The endoscopist scored the difficulty of endoscopy subjectively (0–3). The significance of differences between treatments was evaluated using Friedman's test. Time for entering the stomach was 9.4 (4.7–15.9) (median (minimum–maximum)), 6.6 (5.2–11.7), 8.4 (6.3–16.5), and 7.7 (5.1–14.7) seconds and for entering the duodenum from the stomach was 20.5 (13.8–40.9), 18.2 (10.3–39.8), 20.2 (16.2–119.5), and 22.2 (11.8–83.8) seconds for H, HG, M, and B treatments, respectively. There were no significant differences in the time for, or difficulty of, endoscopy. We conclude that any of these drugs can be used satisfactorily at the doses and combinations tested to pre‐medicate cats prior to general anesthesia for GD.     

Comparison of sedative and some cardiopulmonary effects of intramuscular medetomidine or medetomidine–tramadol in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical and physiologic effects of intramuscular (IM) administration of medetomidine with and without tramadol in dogs.Study designProspective experimental study.AnimalsA group of eight mixed breed dogs of both sexes, aged 1–2 years, weighing 16.0 ± 0.6 kg.MethodsEach dog was studied twice at ≥1 week interval. Medetomidine (5 μg kg^–1; treatment M) was administered IM alone or with tramadol (4 mg kg^–1; treatment MT). Sedation was scored by a system that included vocalization, posture, appearance, interactive behaviors, resistance to restraint and response to noise. Times from drug administration to ataxia, impaired walking, head drop, sternal and lateral position and standing were recorded. Sedation score, heart rate, respiratory rate, rectal temperature, end-tidal carbon dioxide (Pe′CO₂), hemoglobin oxygen saturation and mean noninvasive blood pressure were recorded and compared 15 minutes before and 15, 30 and 45 minutes after drug administration.ResultsDogs administered MT had higher sedation scores than dogs administered M at 30 and 45 minutes after drug administration (p < 0.05). Times to ataxia, impaired walking, head drop and sternal recumbency were not different between the treatments. Time to lateral recumbency was longer in M than in MT (21.1 ± 1.0 versus 17.6 ± 0.7 minutes, respectively; p < 0.05). Time to standing was longer in MT than in M (67.9 ± 1.4 versus 54.5 ± 1.9 minutes, respectively; p < 0.001). Measured physiological variables did not differ between the treatments, with the exception of Pe′CO₂, which was higher in MT than in M at all post-treatment evaluation times (p < 0.001).Conclusions and clinical relevanceTramadol combined with medetomidine resulted in greater sedation scores (deeper sedation) than medetomidine alone in dogs, and minimal adverse changes in the physiologic variables were measured.     

Cardiorespiratory,sedative and antinociceptive effects of dexmedetomidine alone or in combination with methadone,morphine or tramadol in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cardiorespiratory, sedative and antinociceptive effects of dexmedetomidine alone or in combination with methadone, morphine or tramadol in dogs.Study designExperimental, blinded, randomized, crossover study.AnimalsSix mixed breed dogs (two males and four females) weighing 10 ± 4 kg.MethodsThe animals were randomly divided into four treatments: D (10 μg kg^?1 of dexmedetomidine), DM (dexmedetomidine 10 μg kg^?1 and methadone 0.5 mg kg^?1); DMO (dexmedetomidine 10 μg kg^?1 and morphine 0.5 mg kg^?1), and DT (dexmedetomidine 10 μg kg^?1 and tramadol 2 mg kg^?1). The combinations were administered intramuscularly in all treatments. The variables evaluated were heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), rectal temperature (RT), systolic arterial pressure (SAP), sedation scale and pedal withdrawal reflex. These variables were measured at T0 (immediately before the administration of the protocol) and every 15 minutes thereafter until T105.ResultsA decrease in HR and f_R occurred in all the treatments compared with T0, but no significant difference was observed between the treatments. The RT decreased from T45 onward in all the treatments. The SAP did not show a difference between the treatments, but in the DT treatment, the SAP was lower at T30 and T45 compared with T0. The D treatment had lower scores of sedation at T15 to T75 compared with the other treatments, and the DMO and DM treatments showed higher scores at T60 and T75 compared with DT.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe treatments with morphine and methadone added to the dexmedetomidine showed higher sedation scores than the control treatment and the treatment with tramadol added to the dexmedetomidine showed no relevant differences in any of the variables evaluated in the study.     

Use of a pulsed electromagnetic field for treatment of post-operative pain in dogs: a pilot study

Objective To determine if pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy reduces post‐operative pain in dogs following ovariohysterectomy, and to evaluate PEMF interaction with post‐operative morphine analgesia. Study design Randomized controlled clinical trail. Animals Sixteen healthy dogs weighing 18 (10–32) kg [median (range)] and aged 13 (3–36) months. Materials and methods Anesthesia consisted of atropine (0.04 mg kg^?1, SC), acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^?1, SC), fentanyl (0.01 mg kg^?1, SC), thiopental (10–15 mg kg^?1, IV) and halothane in oxygen. Ovariohysterectomies were performed by senior veterinary students. Pain score (numeric rating scale, 0–28), pulse rate, respiratory rate, indirect mean arterial pressure (MAP), and body temperature were evaluated prior to anesthetic premedication, at extubation, 30 minutes after extubation, and then hourly for 6 hours. Following extubation, dogs were randomly divided into four groups: a control group that received 0.9% NaCl, IV, and no PEMF; a magnet group that received 0.9% NaCl, IV, and PEMF; a morphine group that received morphine 0.25 mg kg^?1, IV, and no PEMF; and, a magnet/morphine group that received morphine 0.25 mg kg^?1, IV, and PEMF. A single observer, blinded to treatment, obtained all behavioral observations and physiologic data. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis statistical test with a significance of p < 0.05. Results Significant differences in MAP (mm Hg) [median (range)] occurred at 300 minutes [morphine 108 (83–114) and magnet/morphine 90 (83–97) < magnet 135 (113–117)], and at 360 minutes [magnet/morphine 93 (81–100) < control 127 (111–129) and magnet 126 (111–129)]. At 30 minutes the total pain score for the magnet/morphine group [1.5 (0–5)] was significantly less than control [8 (6–13)], but not different from magnet [5.5 (4–7)] or morphine [4.5 (2–9)]. Conclusions and clinical relevance Although no clear benefit was seen in this study, the results suggest that PEMF may augment morphine analgesia following ovariohysterectomy in dogs, and that further study of the analgesic effects of PEMF is warranted.     

Evaluation of intraperitoneal and incisional lidocaine or bupivacaine for analgesia following ovariohysterectomy in the dog

Objective To determine if intraperitoneal (IP) and incisional (SC) lidocaine or bupivacaine provide analgesia following ovariohysterectomy (OHE). Study Design Prospective, randomized, controlled, blinded clinical trial. Animals Thirty dogs presenting to the Veterinary Teaching Hospital for elective OHE. Methods Dogs were pre‐medicated with acepromazine and butorphanol, induced with thiopental and maintained with isoflurane. They were randomly assigned to three groups: 10 received 8.8 mg kg^?1 2% lidocaine with epinephrine IP (LID); 10 received 4.4 mg kg^?1 0.75% bupivacaine IP (BUP); and 10 received 0.9% saline IP (SAL) upon completion of OHE. All IP doses were standardized to 0.88 mL kg^?1 with saline. An additional 2 mL of undiluted solution was placed SC prior to incisional closure. Dogs were scored at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 6, 8 and 18 hours post‐extubation by one observer. Dogs were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and sedation, and a composite pain scale (CPS) that included physiologic and behavioral variables. Dogs were treated with 0.22 mg kg^?1 butorphanol + acepromazine if their VAS (pain) score was >50. Parametric variables were analyzed using Student's t‐test or repeated measures anova as appropriate. Non‐parametric variables were analyzed by χ²‐test. Results There were no significant differences in age, weight, incision length, surgery time, anesthesia time, or total thiopental dose among groups. Peak post‐surgical pain scores for all groups occurred at 0.5 hours and returned to baseline by 18 hours. Dogs in the BUP group had significantly lower VAS‐pain scores overall than dogs in the SAL group. Seven out of 10 dogs in the SAL group, 4/10 in the LID group and 2/10 in the BUP group were treated with supplemental acepromazine and butorphanol. No differences between groups were detected with the CPS. No adverse side‐effects were observed. Conclusions and clinical relevance Our findings support the use of IP and SC bupivacaine for post‐operative analgesia following OHE in the dog.     

RESEARCH PAPER: Sedative and cardiorespiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and buprenorphine administered to cats via oral transmucosal or intramuscular routes

ObjectiveTo determine if buprenorphine plus dexmedetomidine administered via the oral transmucosal route produces sufficient sedation in cats so that students can insert intravenous catheters.Study DesignProspective, randomized, blinded, clinical trial.AnimalsEighty‐seven shelter‐owned female cats aged 4–48 months, weighing 1.1–4.9 kg.MethodsCats were randomly allocated to two treatment groups based on route of drug administration: oral transmucosal (OTM), or intramuscular (IM). Buprenorphine (20 μg kg^?1) plus dexmedetomidine (20 μg kg^?1) were administered as pre‐medicants via one of these two routes. Prior to and 20 minutes after drug administration, heart and respiratory rates, systolic arterial pressure, and posture were measured and recorded. Twenty minutes after drug administration the same variables plus each cat’s response to clipper sound, clipping, and restraint were recorded; higher scores indicated more sedation.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups prior to pre‐medication. Within each treatment group heart rate was significantly lower 20 minutes after treatment, but it did not differ significantly between the two groups. Twenty minutes after treatment, respiratory rate was significantly less in the OTM group, but did not differ significantly between the two groups. Systolic arterial pressure did not differ within or between the two groups at either time. Scores for posture increased significantly within both groups, and cats in the IM group had higher scores after treatment. Twenty minutes after treatment, cats in the IM group had higher scores for clipping and restraint than OTM cats. Ketamine (IM) was necessary to facilitate catheterization in 25% and 16% of cats in the OTM and IM groups, respectively, but this was not significantly different.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAdministration of dexmedetomidine plus buprenorphine by the OTM route is easy to perform, but produces less sedation than the IM route for IV catheterization in cats.     

Sedative-hypnotic effects of midazolam in goats after intravenous and intramuscular administration

Objective To examine the effect of dose and route of administration on the sedative‐hypnotic effects of midazolam. Design Prospective randomized controlled study Animals Six indigenous, African bred goats. Methods Pilot studies indicated that the optimum dose of midazolam for producing sedation was 0.6 mg kg^?1 for intramuscular (IM) injection, while the optimum intravenous (IV) doses causing hypnosis without, and with loss of palpebral reflexes were 0.6 mg kg^?1 and 1.2 mg kg^?1, respectively. These doses and routes of administration were compared with a saline placebo in a randomized block design in the main experiment, and the sedative‐hypnotic effects evaluated according to pre‐determined scales. Results Intramuscular midazolam produced sedation with or without sternal recumbency in all animals with the peak effect occurring 20 minutes after administration. The scores for IM sedation with midazolam were significantly different (p < 0.05) from placebo. Intravenous midazolam at 0.6 mg kg^?1 resulted in hypnosis, and at 1.2 mg kg^?1 increased reflex suppression was observed. The maximum scores for hypnosis at both doses were obtained 5 minutes after IV injection. The mean (± SD) duration of lateral recumbency was 10.8 (± 3.8) minutes after IV midazolam (0.6 mg kg^?1) compared to 20 (± 5.2) minutes after midazolam at 1.2 mg kg^?1. Compared to baseline, the heart rate increased significantly (p < 0.05) after high dose IV midazolam. Conclusion Intramuscular midazolam (0.6 mg kg^?1) produced maximum sedation 20 minutes after injection. Intravenous injection produced maximum hypnosis within 5 minutes. Increasing the IV dose from 0.6 to 1.2 mg kg^?1 resulted in increased reflex suppression and duration of hypnosis. Clinical relevance For a profound effect with rapid onset midazolam should be given IV in doses between 0.6 and 1.2 mg kg^?1.     

Comparison of analgesia provided by lidocaine, lidocaine-morphine or lidocaine-tramadol delivered epidurally in dogs following orchiectomy

ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare the postoperative analgesia provided by epidural lidocaine, lidocaine/morphine or lidocaine/tramadol in dogs following elective orchiectomy.Study designProspective experimental trial.AnimalsThirty-six mongrel dogs aged 2-8 years old, weighing 6.6-22 kg.MethodsThe dogs received 6.0 mg kg^?1 of lidocaine combined with 1.0 mg kg^?1 of tramadol, 0.1 mg kg^?1 of morphine or 0.01 mL kg^?1 of 0.9% NaCl epidurally. Analgesia was assessed at 4, 8, 12, 18 and 24 hours (T4, T8, T12 and T24) after the offset of lidocaine using a scale composed of physiologic and behavioral parameters. Rescue analgesia with morphine (0.2 mg kg^?1, IM) was performed if the evaluation score exceeded 10 during the postoperative period. The scores over time were analyzed using the Friedman’s two-way analysis of variance and the comparison between groups was made by the Kruskal-Wallis test with statistical significances accepted if p = 0.05.ResultsThere were no differences in the pain scores between the morphine and tramadol groups over time and no rescue analgesia was administered. In the NaCl group, rescue analgesia was needed at T4, T8 and T12. Within this group, the final evaluation times (T18 and T24) had lower pain scores than at T4, T8 and T12.Conclusions and clinical relevanceEpidural lidocaine/tramadol provided an analgesic effect comparable to that of epidural lidocaine/morphine during the first 12 hours after surgical castration without substantial side effects, suggesting that tramadol may be an effective postoperative analgesic in dogs submitted to this surgical procedure.     

The use of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy to provide post-operative analgesia in the dog

Buprenorphine is an effective analgesic when administered epidurally to humans. The purpose of this study was to compare epidural buprenorphine (B; n = 10) with epidural morphine (M; n = 10) for post‐operative analgesia in dogs undergoing cranial cruciate ligament repair. All dogs were premedicated with acepromazine (0.1 mg kg^?1 IM), induced with propofol (4–6 mg kg^?1 IV) and maintained with halothane in oxygen. Dogs were randomly assigned to receive B (0.004 mg kg^?1) or M (0.1 mg kg^?1) in the lumbosacral epidural space in a total volume of 0.2 mL kg^?1. End‐tidal halothane and CO₂ and temperature were recorded every 15 minutes until extubation (t = 0). A numerical rating pain score (SPS) was recorded at t = 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 10 and 24 hours by a blinded observer. Dogs received rescue morphine (1.0 mg kg^?1 IM) if indicated by SPS and the time of rescue analgesic administration was recorded. Observable side‐effects such as urinary retention, sedation or pruritus were recorded. Data were analyzed with repeated measures anova . Mean ± SD body weight (kg) and age (yrs) for B dogs was 34.2 ± 10.8 and 5.5 ± 2.8; for M dogs these values were 36.6 ± 13.5 and 5.9 ± 3.3. Mean ± SD SPS for B dogs at t = 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 10 and 24 hours were 1.2 ± 0.75, 3.2 ± 2.0, 4.5 ± 4.3, 4.6 ± 3.4, 4.7 ± 3.0, 5.0 ± 4.9 and 5.1 ± 3.5. For M dogs these values were 1.7 ± 0.5, 2.6 ± 2.0, 3.7 ± 0.75, 4.2 ± 2.2, 4.1 ± 3.0, 3.1 ± 2.1 and 3.9 ± 1.9. There were no significant differences between B and M with respect to SPS, times or frequency of rescue morphine administration, end‐tidal halothane and CO₂, or esophageal temperature. Fifty per cent of dogs in both groups required rescue morphine. Buprenorphine is as effective as morphine for epidural analgesia in healthy dogs undergoing hindlimb orthopedic surgery.