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.     

Effects of graded doses of propofol for anesthesia induction on cardiovascular parameters and intraocular pressures in normal dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of graded doses of propofol on cardiovascular parameters and intraocular pressures (IOP) in normal dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, modified Latin square, cross-over experimental study.AnimalsEleven adult random-source dogs weighing 20.2 ± 5.7 kg.MethodsThere were three treatment groups: propofol 8 mg kg^?1 intravenous (IV) until loss of jaw tone (Group P), propofol until loss of jaw tone +20% (Group P20), and propofol until loss of jaw tone +50% (Group P50). Atracurium 0.1 mg kg^?1 IV was administered in all treatments immediately after the propofol. All dogs received the three treatments in a randomized order, with at least a one week interval between treatments. Direct arterial blood pressure and IOP by applanation tonometry were obtained at baseline, after 5 minutes of pre-oxygenation (before induction), before, and after intubation. Blood gas samples were obtained at baseline, after pre-oxygenation, and before intubation.ResultsThere was no significant difference in IOP readings at any time point among groups. The IOP was significantly higher before intubation versus before induction in all three groups. There was a significantly smaller change in systolic, mean (MAP), and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressures in the P50 group compared with the P group after intubation. There was a significantly smaller change in MAP and DAP in the P50 group compared with the P20 group after intubation. The increase in CO₂ from before induction to before intubation was significantly greater in the P50 group than in the P or P20 groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceGraded doses of propofol did not affect the increase in IOP observed with propofol induction in normal dogs. Higher doses of propofol are of no apparent additional benefit in animals who cannot tolerate an abrupt increase in IOP but may be of benefit in dogs who cannot tolerate an abrupt increase in blood pressure accompanying orotracheal intubation.     

Dose and cardiopulmonary effects of propofol alone or with midazolam for induction of anesthesia in critically ill dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the dose and cardiopulmonary effects of propofol alone or with midazolam for induction of anesthesia in American Society of Anesthesiologists status ≥III dogs requiring emergency abdominal surgery.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded, clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 19 client-owned dogs.MethodsDogs were sedated with fentanyl (2 μg kg^–1) intravenously (IV) for instrumentation for measurement of heart rate, arterial blood pressure, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance index, arterial blood gases, respiratory rate and rectal temperature. After additional IV fentanyl (3 μg kg^–1), the quality of sedation was scored and cardiopulmonary variables recorded. Induction of anesthesia was with IV propofol (1 mg kg^–1) and saline (0.06 mL kg^–1; group PS; nine dogs) or midazolam (0.3 mg kg^–1; group PM; 10 dogs), with additional propofol (0.25 mg kg^–1) IV every 6 seconds until endotracheal intubation. Induction/intubation quality was scored, and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. Variables were recorded for 5 minutes with the dog in lateral recumbency, breathing spontaneously, and then in dorsal recumbency with mechanical ventilation for the next 15 minutes. A general linear mixed model was used with post hoc analysis for multiple comparisons between groups (p < 0.05).ResultsThere were no differences in group demographics, temperature and cardiopulmonary variables between groups or within groups before or after induction. The propofol doses for induction of anesthesia were significantly different between groups, 1.9 ± 0.5 and 1.1 ± 0.5 mg kg^–1 for groups PS and PM, respectively, and the induction/intubation score was significantly better for group PM.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMidazolam co-induction reduced the propofol induction dose and improved the quality of induction in critically ill dogs without an improvement in cardiopulmonary variables, when compared with a higher dose of propofol alone.     

Cardiorespiratory effects of desflurane in dogs given romifidine or medetomidine before induction of anesthesia with propofol

The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of desflurane after induction of anesthesia with propofol in dogs sedated with romifidine or medetomidine. Each of 8 healthy dogs received intravenously, in random order, 3 preanesthetic protocols: romifidine, 40 microg/kg of body weight (BW) (R40); romifidine, 80 microg/kg BW (R80); and medetomidine, 10 microg/kg BW (MED). Cardiovascular and respiratory variables were recorded during the procedure. Time to extubation, time to sternal recumbency, and time to standing were also recorded. Heart rate and respiratory rate decreased significantly during sedation from baseline values, but there were no differences between the means for the 3 preanesthetic protocols. Mean values for heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, systolic arterial pressure, diastolic arterial pressure, respiratory rate, tidal volume, arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2 level, pH, and arterial blood gas values during anesthesia were similar for the 3 protocols. The mean end-tidal desflurane concentration was significantly lower with the R80 protocol than with the R40 protocol. The mean time to extubation was significantly shorter with the R40 protocol than with the R80 and MED protocols.     

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

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

A comparison of the effects of propofol and etomidate on the induction of anesthesia and on cardiopulmonary parameters in dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of propofol or etomidate on induction quality, arterial blood pressure, blood gases, and recovery quality in normal dogs.Study designRandomized, blinded trial.AnimalsEighteen purpose-bred adult Beagles.MethodsDogs were randomly assigned to receive propofol at 8 mg kg⁻¹ or etomidate at 4 mg kg⁻¹ intravenously (IV) administered to effect. Midazolam was administered at 0.3 mg kg⁻¹ IV as pre-medication at least 1 minute prior to induction. Direct arterial blood pressure, arterial blood gases, and heart rate were obtained at baseline, before induction, after induction, and for every 5 minutes afterwards until the dog began to swallow and the trachea was extubated. The dogs were allowed to breathe room air with the endotracheal tube in place.ResultsThe systolic arterial pressure (SAP) was higher in the etomidate group compared with the propofol group after induction. The SAP and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were higher in the etomidate group compared with the propofol group at 5 minutes. The recovery quality and ataxia score were worse in the etomidate group compared with the propofol group. Time from extubation to sternal recumbency and sternal recumbency to standing was longer in the etomidate group compared with the propofol group. The heart rate, PaCO₂, and HCO₃ were higher in the propofol group compared with the etomidate group after induction. The PaO₂ and SaO₂ were lower in the propofol group compared with the etomidate group after induction. The SAP and MAP were lower in the propofol group at 5 minutes compared with baseline.Conclusion and clinical relevancePropofol caused a decrease in SAP and MAP which was not observed with etomidate. Etomidate caused longer and poorer recoveries than propofol.     

Clinical observations during induction and recovery of xylazine-midazolam- propofol anesthesia in horses

To evaluate clinical usefulness of xylazine (1.0 mg/kg)-midazolam (20 microg/kg)-propofol (3.0 mg/kg) anesthesia in horses, 6 adult Thoroughbred horses were examined. The quality of induction varied from poor to excellent and 5 out of 6 horses presented myotonus in the front half of the body. However, paddling immediately after induction observed in other reports of equine propofol anesthesia was not observed. Recovery time was 35.3 +/- 9.3 min and the quality of recovery was calm and smooth in all horses. Respiration rate decreased after induction and hypoxemia was observed during lateral recumbency. Heart rate also decreased after induction, however mean arterial blood pressure was maintained above approximately 100 mmHg.     

Clinical comparison of recovery from total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane in dogs

The characteristics of recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane was clinically compared in 149 client-owned dogs that anesthetized for surgical or diagnostic procedures. In all dogs, anesthesia was induced with an intravenous injection of propofol following premedication with acepromazine or diazepam. As a result, 58 dogs anesthetized with propofol-TIVA showed slower but smoother recovery than 91 dogs anesthetized with isoflurane anesthesia. The dogs stood at 34.5 +/- 19.3 and 27.7 +/- 17.2 min after propofol-TIVA and isoflurane anesthesia, respectively. Adverse effects, including hypersalivation, neurologic excitement (paddling, muscle tremor/twitching, opisthotonos) and vomiting/retching, were observed in similar infrequent incidences during the recovery from both anesthetic protocols. Propofol-TIVA is suggested to be an alternative anesthetic protocol for canine practice.     

Dose requirement and cardiopulmonary effects of diluted and undiluted propofol for induction of anaesthesia in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the dose, cardiopulmonary effects and quality of anaesthetic induction in dogs using propofol (10 mg mL^–1) and diluted propofol (5 mg mL^–1).Study designRandomized, blinded, clinical study.AnimalsA total of 28 client-owned dogs (12 males/16 females).MethodsFollowing intramuscular acepromazine (0.02 mg kg^–1) and methadone (0.2 mg kg^–1), propofol (UP, 10 mg mL^–1) or diluted propofol (DP, 5 mg mL^–1) was administered intravenously (0.2 mL kg^–1 minute^–1) by an anaesthetist unaware of the allocated group to achieve tracheal intubation. Sedation, intubation and induction quality were scored from 0 to 3. Pre- and post-induction pulse rate (PR), respiratory rate (f_R) and systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial blood pressure were compared. Time to first breath and induction dose were recorded. Data were analysed for normality and Mann–Whitney U or Student t tests were performed where appropriate. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (range).ResultsThe propofol dose administered to achieve induction was lower in the DP group (2.62 ± 0.48 mg kg^–1) than in the UP group (3.48 ± 1.17 mg kg^–1) (p = 0.021). No difference was observed in pre- and post-induction PR, SAP, MAP, DAP and f_R between groups. The differences between post-induction and pre-induction values of these variables were also similar between groups. Time to first breath did not differ between groups. Sedation scores were similar between groups. Quality of tracheal intubation was marginally better with UP 0 (0–1) than with DP 1 (0–2) (p = 0.036), but overall quality of induction was similar between groups [UP 0 (0–1) and DP 0 (0–1), p = 0.549].Conclusion and clinical relevanceDiluting propofol reduced the dose to induce anaesthesia without significantly altering the cardiopulmonary variables.     

Clinical evaluation of total intravenous anesthesia using a combination of propofol and medetomidine following anesthesia induction with medetomidine, guaifenesin and propofol for castration in Thoroughbred horses

Seven Thoroughbred horses were castrated under total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using propofol and medetomidine. After premedication with medetomidine (5.0 μg/kg, intravenously), anesthesia was induced with guaifenesin (100 mg/kg, intravenously) and propofol (3.0 mg/kg, intravenously) and maintained with constant rate infusions of medetomidine (0.05 μg/kg/min) and propofol (0.1 mg/kg/min). Quality of induction was judged excellent to good. Three horses showed insufficient anesthesia and received additional anesthetic. Arterial blood pressure changed within an acceptable range in all horses. Decreases in respiratory rate and hypercapnia were observed in all horses. Three horses showed apnea within a short period of time. Recovery from anesthesia was calm and smooth in all horses. The TIVA-regimen used in this study provides clinically effective anesthesia for castration in horses. However, assisted ventilation should be considered to minimize respiratory depression.     

Clinical usefulness of propofol as an anesthetic induction agent in dogs and cats

Propofol was used as an induction agent of general anesthesia in 77 dogs and 64 cats, all client owned, for a variety of surgeries/treatments or diagnostic procedures. The mean intravenous doses of propofol required to achieve endotracheal intubation in dogs and cats were 6.5 +/- 1.4 mg/kg and 10.1 +/- 2.8 mg /kg, respectively. Most of the animals could be induced to anesthesia smoothly by the administration of propofol with a high incidence of apnea. Propofol is a clinically valuable anesthetic induction agent in both dogs and cats, however, care must be taken for apnea.     

Interferon induction in dogs.

A synthetic complex of poly (I)-poly (C) with poly-L-lysine and carboxymethyl cellulose (poly ICLC), as well as UV-inactivated Newcastle disease virus, B-1 strain, was used to induce interferon production in dogs. Several criteria were used for interferon specificity. The interferon response depended on dosage and route of inoculation. Serum interferon concentrations usually reached a peak by 8 hours after inoculation (AI), rapidly declined thereafter, and were nondetectable in most instances at 24 hours AI. Dogs responded less to interferon inducers when reinoculated 2 days after primary induction. The interferon response was biphasic (2 and 8 hours AI) when reinoculated 1 week after primary inoculation. Reinoculation 2 weeks after primary inoculation simulated the first response. Although both inducers caused severe lymphopenia in dogs, the toxic side effects would limit clinical use (in dogs) of poly ICLC, but not of UV-inactivated Newcastle disease virus.     

丙泊酚诱导及异氟醚维持麻醉对犬血气指标的影响

异氟醚(Isoflurane,Forane)是目前应用最为广泛的吸入麻醉剂之一.异氟醚是安氟醚的同分异构体,1965年由Terrell首先合成,是新型的卤族麻醉药[1].丙泊酚是在20世纪70年代合成的一种酚的衍生物,是一种新型安全的注射麻醉剂[2].在人医运用十分广泛,近些年来国内兽医才逐渐开始使用.     

The use of propofol for induction of anaesthesia in dogs premedicated with acepromazine, butorphanol and acepromazine-butorphanol

Cardiovascular, pulmonary and anaesthetic-analgesic responses were evaluated in 18 male and female dogs to determine the effect of the injectable anaesthetic propofol used in conjuction with acepromazine and butorphanol. The dogs were randomly divided into three groups. Dogs in Group A were premeditated with 0.1 mg/kg of intramuscular acepromazine followed by an induction dose of 4.4 mg/kg of intravenous propofol; Group B received 0.2 mg/kg of intramuscular butorphanol and 4.4 mg/kg of intravenous propofol; dogs in Group AB were administered a premeditation combination of 0.1 mg/kg of intramuscular acepromazine and 0.2 mg/kg of intramuscular butorphanol, followed by induction with 3.3 mg/kg of intravenous propofol. The induction dose of propofol was given over a period of 30-60 seconds to determine responses and duration of anaesthesia. Observations recorded in the dogs included heart and respiratory rates, indirect arterial blood pressures (systolic, diastolic and mean), cardiac rhythm, end-tidal CO, tension, oxygen saturation, induction time, duration of anaesthesia, recovery time and adverse reactions. The depth of anaesthesia was assessed by the response to mechanical noxious stimuli (tail clamping), the degree of muscle relaxation and the strength of reflexes. Significant respiratory depression was seen after propofol induction in both groups receiving butorphanol with or without acepromazine. The incidence of apnea was 4/6 dogs in Group B, and 5/6 dogs in Group AB. The incidence of apnea was also correlated to the rate of propofol administration. Propofol-mediated decreases in arterial blood pressure were observed in all three groups. Moderate bradycardia (minimum value > 55 beats/min) was observed in both Groups B and AB. There were no cardiac dysrhythmias noted in any of the 18 dogs. The anaesthetic duration and recovery times were longer in dogs premeditated with acepromazine/butorphanol.