Cardiovascular tolerance of intravenous bupivacaine in broiler chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) anesthetized with isoflurane

Objective

To determine the median effective dose (ED₅₀) of intravenous (IV) bupivacaine associated with a 50% probability of causing clinically relevant cardiovascular effects [defined as 30% change in heart rate (HR) or mean arterial pressure (MAP)] in chickens anesthetized with isoflurane.

Effects of intravenous lidocaine, ketamine, and the combination on the minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of intravenous lidocaine (L) and ketamine (K) alone and their combination (LK) on the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane (SEVO) in dogs.Study designProspective randomized, Latin-square experimental study.AnimalsSix, healthy, adult Beagles, 2 males, 4 females, weighing 7.8 – 12.8 kg.MethodsAnesthesia was induced with SEVO in oxygen delivered by face mask. The tracheas were intubated and the lungs ventilated to maintain normocapnia. Baseline minimum alveolar concentration of SEVO (MAC_B) was determined in duplicate for each dog using an electrical stimulus and then the treatment was initiated. Each dog received each of the following treatments, intravenously as a loading dose (LD) followed by a constant rate infusion (CRI): lidocaine (LD 2 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 50 μg kg⁻¹minute⁻¹), lidocaine (LD 2 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 100 μgkg⁻¹ minute⁻¹), lidocaine (LD 2 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 200 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹), ketamine (LD 3 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 50 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹), ketamine (LD 3 mgkg⁻¹, CRI 100 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹), or lidocaine (LD 2 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 100 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) + ketamine (LD 3 mg kg⁻¹, CRI 100 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) in combination. Post-treatment MAC (MAC_T) determination started 30 minutes after initiation of treatment.ResultsLeast squares mean ± SEM MAC_B of all groups was 1.9 ± 0.2%. Lidocaine infusions of 50, 100, and 200 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ significantly reduced MAC_B by 22.6%, 29.0%, and 39.6%, respectively. Ketamine infusions of 50 and 100 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹ significantly reduced MAC_B by 40.0% and 44.7%, respectively. The combination of K and L significantly reduced MAC_B by 62.8%.Conclusions and clinical relevanceLidocaine and K, alone and in combination, decrease SEVO MAC in dogs. Their use, at the doses studied, provides a clinically important reduction in the concentration of SEVO during anesthesia in dogs.     

The effect of midazolam or lidocaine administration prior to etomidate induction of anesthesia on heart rate,arterial pressure,intraocular pressure and serum cortisol concentration in healthy dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate selected effects of midazolam or lidocaine administered prior to etomidate for co-induction of anesthesia in healthy dogs.Study designProspective crossover experimental study.AnimalsA group of 12 healthy adult female Beagle dogs.MethodsDogs were premedicated with intravenous (IV) butorphanol (0.3 mg kg^–1), and anesthesia was induced with etomidate following midazolam (0.3 mg kg^–1), lidocaine (2 mg kg^–1) or physiologic saline (1 mL) IV. Heart rate (HR), arterial blood pressure, respiratory rate (f_R) and intraocular pressure (IOP) were recorded following butorphanol, after co-induction administration, after etomidate administration and immediately following intubation. Baseline IOP values were also obtained prior to sedation. Etomidate dose requirements and the presence of myoclonus, as well as coughing or gagging during intubation were recorded. Serum cortisol concentrations were measured prior to premedication and 6 hours following etomidate administration.ResultsBlood pressure, f_R and IOP were similar among treatments. Blood pressure decreased in all treatments following etomidate administration and generally returned to sedated values following intubation. HR increased following intubation with midazolam and lidocaine but remained stable in the saline treatment. The dose of etomidate (median, interquartile range, range) required for intubation was lower following midazolam (2.2, 2.1–2.6, 1.7–4.1 mg kg⁻¹) compared with lidocaine (2.7, 2.4–3.6, 2.2–5.1 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.012) or saline (3.0, 2.8–3.8, 1.9–5.1 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.015). Coughing or gagging was less frequent with midazolam compared with saline. Myoclonus was not observed. Changes in serum cortisol concentrations were not different among treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMidazolam administration reduced etomidate dose requirements and improved intubation conditions compared with lidocaine or saline treatments. Neither co-induction agent caused clinically relevant differences in measured cardiopulmonary function, IOP or cortisol concentrations compared with saline in healthy dogs. Apnea was noted in all treatments following the induction of anesthesia and preoxygenation is recommended.     

Effects of two continuous infusion doses of lidocaine on isoflurane minimum anesthetic concentration in chickens

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of two intravenous (IV) doses of lidocaine on the minimum anesthetic concentration (MAC) of isoflurane in chickens.Study designBlinded, prospective, randomized, experimental crossover study.AnimalsA total of six adult female chickens weighing 1.90 ± 0.15 kg.MethodsChickens were anesthetized with isoflurane and mechanically ventilated. Isoflurane MAC values were determined (T0) in duplicate using an electrical noxious stimulus and the bracketing method. After MAC determination, a low dose (LD; 3 mg kg^–1 followed by 3 mg kg^–1 hour^–1) or high dose (HD; 6 mg kg^?1 followed by 6 mg kg^?1 hour^–1) of lidocaine was administered IV. MAC determination was repeated at 1.5 (T1.5) and 3 (T3) hours of lidocaine administration and blood was collected for analysis of plasma lidocaine and monoethylglycinexylidide (MEGX) concentrations. Pulse rate, peripheral hemoglobin oxygen saturation, noninvasive systolic arterial pressure and cloacal temperature were recorded at T0, T1.5 and T3. Treatments were separated by 1 week. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects model for repeated measures.ResultsMAC of isoflurane (mean ± standard deviation) at T0 was 1.47 ± 0.18%. MAC at T1.5 and T3 was 1.32 ± 0.27% and 1.26 ± 0.09% (treatment LD); and 1.28 ± 0.06% and 1.30 ± 0.06% (treatment HD). There were no significant differences between treatments or times. Maximum plasma lidocaine concentrations at T3 were 496 ± 98 and 1200 ± 286 ng mL^–1 for treatments LD and HD, respectively, and were not significantly different from T1.5. With treatment HD, plasma concentration of MEGX was significantly higher at T3 than at T1.5. Physiological variables were not significantly different among times with either treatment.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAdministration of lidocaine did not significantly change isoflurane MAC in chickens. Within treatments, plasma lidocaine concentrations were not significantly different at 1.5 and 3 hours.     

Determination of the effective dosage of tiletamine–zolazepam–ketamine–xylazine,with or without methadone,in dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effective dosage of the combination tiletamine–zolazepam–ketamine–xylazine (TKX), with or without methadone, in dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, experimental study.AnimalsA total of 29 dogs.MethodsDogs were randomly administered TKX (group TKX, n = 13) or combined with 0.3 mg kg^–1 of methadone (group TKXM, n = 16) intramuscularly. The TKX solution contained tiletamine (50 mg mL^–1), zolazepam (50 mg mL^–1), ketamine (80 mg mL^–1) and xylazine (20 mg mL^–1). The effective dosages for immobility in 50% and 95% of the population (ED₅₀ and ED₉₅) were estimated using the up-and-down method. Approximately 20 minutes after drug administration, a skin incision was performed and the response was judged as positive or negative if the dogs moved or did not move, respectively. The TKX volume for the subsequent dog in the same group was increased or decreased by 0.005 mL kg^–1 if the response of the previous dog was positive or negative, respectively. Heart and respiratory rates, and sedation/anesthesia scores (range 0–21) were recorded before and 15 minutes after drug administration.ResultsEstimated ED₅₀ and ED₉₅ (95% confidence intervals) were: TKX, 0.025 (0.020–0.029) and 0.026 (0.010–0.042) mL kg^–1; TKXM, 0.022 (0.018–0.025) and 0.033 (0.017–0.049) mL kg^–1. Median (interquartile range) scores for sedation/anesthesia were 17 (16–18) and 17 (15–20), and times until lateral recumbency were 5 (4–6) and 6 (4–10) minutes in TKX and TKXM, respectively (p > 0.05). In both groups heart and respiratory rates decreased, but values remained acceptable for anesthetized dogs.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe results provide a guide for volumes of TKX and TKXM in dogs requiring restraint for minimally invasive procedures. Inclusion of methadone in the TKX combination did not influence ED₅₀.     

The effects of diazepam or midazolam on the dose of propofol required to induce anaesthesia in cats

ObjectivesAssess effects of benzodiazepine administration on the propofol dose required to induce anaesthesia in healthy cats, investigate differences between midazolam and diazepam, and determine an optimal benzodiazepine dose for co-induction.Study designProspective, randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial.AnimalsNinety client-owned cats (ASA I and II) with a median (interquartile range) body mass of 4.0 (3.4–4.9) kg.MethodsAll cats received 0.01 mg kg⁻¹ acepromazine and 0.2 mg kg⁻¹ methadone intravenously (IV). Fifteen minutes later, sedation was scored on a scale of 1–5, with 5 indicating greatest sedation. Propofol, 2 mg kg⁻¹, administered IV, was followed by either midazolam or diazepam at 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 or 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ or saline 0.1 mL kg⁻¹. Further propofol was administered until endotracheal intubation was possible. Patient signalment, sedation score, propofol dosage and adverse reactions were recorded.ResultsMidazolam and diazepam (all doses) significantly reduced the propofol dose required compared with saline (p < 0.001). There was no difference between midazolam and diazepam in propofol dose reduction (p = 0.488). All individual doses of midazolam reduced propofol requirement compared with saline (0.2 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.028; 0.3 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.006; 0.4 mg kg⁻¹, p < 0.001; 0.5 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.009). Diazepam 0.2 mg kg⁻¹ did not reduce the propofol dose compared with saline (p = 0.087), but the remaining doses did (0.3 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.001; 0.4 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.032; 0.5 mg kg⁻¹, p = 0.041). Cats with sedation scores of 3 required less propofol than cats with scores of 2 (p = 0.008). There was no difference between groups in adverse events.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMidazolam (0.2–0.5 mg kg⁻¹) and diazepam (0.3–0.5 mg kg⁻¹) administered IV after 2 mg kg⁻¹ propofol significantly reduced the propofol dose required for tracheal intubation.     

Clinical comparison of two regimens of lidocaine infusion in horses undergoing laparotomy for colic

ObjectiveTo compare, in horses undergoing laparotomy for colic, the effects of administering or not administering a loading intravenous (IV) bolus of lidocaine prior to its constant rate infusion (CRI). Effects investigated during isoflurane anaesthesia were end-tidal isoflurane concentration (Fe’ISO), cardiovascular function, anaesthetic stability and the quality of recovery.Study designProspective, randomized clinical study.AnimalsThirty-six client-owned horses.MethodsHorses were assigned randomly to receive lidocaine as a CRI (50 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) either preceded (LB) or not preceded (L) by a loading dose (1.5 mg kg⁻¹ IV over 15 minutes). Lidocaine infusion (LInf) was started (T0) within 20 minutes after induction of general anaesthesia and discontinued approximately 30 minutes before the end of surgery. Anaesthetic depth, Fe’ISO, intra-operative physiological parameters and quality of recovery were assessed or measured. Data were analysed using one-way anova, t-test, Fisher test, Wilcoxon and Kruskal–Wallis tests as appropriate (p < 0.05).ResultsMean ± SD Fe’ISO was 1.21 ± 0.08% in group LB and 1.23 ± 0.06% in group L. Heart rate was significantly higher in group L than in group LB at times T5-T15, T25, T35 and T95. No difference was found between groups in other measured physiological values, nor in any measure taken to improve these parameters. Recovery phase was comparable and satisfactory in all but one full term pregnant horse in group L which fractured a femur during recovery.ConclusionPreloading with a lidocaine bolus prior to a CRI of lidocaine did not influence isoflurane requirements, cardiopulmonary effects (other than a reduction in heart rate at some time points) or recovery compared to no preloading bolus.Clinical relevanceA loading dose of lidocaine prior to CRI does not confer any advantage in horses undergoing laparotomy for colic.     

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

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

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.     

Pharmacokinetics of intravenous and oral amitriptyline and its active metabolite nortriptyline in Greyhound dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the pharmacokinetics of amitriptyline and its active metabolite nortriptyline after intravenous (IV) and oral amitriptyline administration in healthy dogs.Study designProspective randomized experiment.AnimalsFive healthy Greyhound dogs (three males and two females) aged 2–4 years and weighing 32.5–39.7 kg.MethodsAfter jugular vein catheterization, dogs were administered a single oral or IV dose of amitriptyline (4 mg kg⁻¹). Blood samples were collected at predetermined time points from baseline (0 hours) to 32 hours after administration and plasma concentrations of amitriptyline and nortriptyline were measured by liquid chromatography triple quadrupole mass spectrometry. Non-compartmental pharmacokinetic analyses were performed.ResultsOrally administered amitriptyline was well tolerated, but adverse effects were noted after IV administration. The mean maximum plasma concentration (C_MAX) of amitriptyline was 27.4 ng mL⁻¹ at 1 hour and its mean terminal half-life was 4.33 hours following oral amitriptyline. Bioavailability of oral amitriptyline was 6%. The mean C_MAX of nortriptyline was 14.4 ng mL⁻¹ at 2.05 hours and its mean terminal half-life was 6.20 hours following oral amitriptyline.Conclusions and clinical relevanceAmitriptyline at 4 mg kg⁻¹ administered orally produced low amitriptyline and nortriptyline plasma concentrations. This brings into question whether the currently recommended oral dose of amitriptyline (1–4 mg kg⁻¹) is appropriate in dogs.     

Investigation of escalating and large bolus doses of a novel,nano‐droplet,aqueous 1% propofol formulation in cats

ObjectiveIdentify, describe, and quantitate effects of an escalating dose of a nano-droplet formulation of 1% w/v propofol in telemetered cats.Study designProspective two-period parallel design with one treatment procedure per period.AnimalsFour female intact, purpose-bred domestic short-hair cats.MethodsEach animal served as its own control in each period. Telemetered cats were anesthetized on two separate occasions. In Phase I, cats received propofol (8 mg kg^?1) over 90 seconds. Unless a severe adverse event (SAE) had occurred by this time, repeated doses of 4 mg kg^?1 intravenous (IV) propofol were administered every 3 minutes until the onset of an SAE. In Phase 2, the IV dose of propofol required to produce at least one SAE in Phase I was administered unless an SAE occurred before the dose was completed. Propofol infusion ceased after development of the first SAE. Heart rate, heart rhythm, respiratory rate, systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure, SpO₂ and body temperature were continuously recorded before, during and after propofol administration. The incidence and time to onset of an SAE and dose of propofol required to produce an SAE were recorded. The response criteria included time to lateral recumbency, times to orotracheal intubation and extubation, time to sternal recumbency during recovery, time to and duration of first adverse event(s), and total dose of propofol administered.ResultsThe dose of propofol required to produce an SAE in Phase I was 16.6 and 15.2 mg kg^?1 in Phase 2. Hypotension was the first and most frequently observed SAE.ConclusionsLarger doses of a novel, nano-droplet propofol formulation can produce SAEs similar to those reported for lipid emulsion formulations.Clinical relevanceSystemic arterial blood pressure should be monitored in cats administered IV propofol.     

Systemic lidocaine infusion as an analgesic for intraocular surgery in dogs: a pilot study

Objective To determine if systemic administration of lidocaine during intraocular surgery reduces post-operative ocular pain. Study design Randomized, masked, controlled experimental trial. Animals Twelve dogs weighing 15.5 ± 1.7 kg (mean ± SD) and aged 2.5 ± 0.6 years. Methods All dogs underwent a baseline ophthalmic examination and subjective pain score. Anesthesia consisted of acepromazine (0.1 mg kg⁻¹, IM), propofol (4–6 mg kg⁻¹, IV), and isoflurane in oxygen. There were three groups each receiving a bolus followed by an infusion (n = 4): saline (0.3 mL kg⁻¹ IV + 0.2 mL kg⁻¹hour⁻¹ IV); morphine (0.15 mg kg⁻¹ IV + 0.1 mg kg⁻¹hour⁻¹ IV); and lidocaine (1.0 mg kg⁻¹ IV + 0.025 mg kg⁻¹minute⁻¹ IV). All treatments began 15 minutes prior to starting of phacoemulsification and lens removal from the right eye. Pain scores were recorded at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 16, and 24 hours after t = 0 (extubation). Rescue morphine was administered (1.0 mg kg⁻¹ IM) if the subjective pain score ≥9 (maximum = 24), and the dog was excluded from further data analysis. Differences in pain scores and time-to-treatment failure (TTF) were analyzed using the Wilcoxon's rank sum test. Differences in incidence of treatment failure were analyzed using Fisher's exact test. Physiologic data were analyzed using repeated measures anova . Significance was defined as P < 0.05. Results Incidence of treatment failure was 100% in saline-treated dogs and 50% in morphine- or lidocaine-treated dogs. There was no difference in intraocular pressure, aqueous flare, cell count (or protein) between groups in the operated eye at any time following extubation. Conclusion and clinical relevance This pilot study suggests that intraoperative lidocaine may provide analgesic benefits similar to morphine for intraocular surgery in dogs, but more definitive research is needed. This model appears to be appropriate for pain assessment studies as the negative control group demonstrated 100% failure rate.     

Pharmacokinetics of hydromorphone hydrochloride in healthy dogs

ObjectiveTo assess the pharmacokinetics of hydromorphone administered intravenously (IV) or subcutaneously (SC) to dogs.Study designRandomized experimental trial.AnimalsSeven healthy male neutered Beagles aged 12.13 ± 1.2 months and weighing 11.72 ± 1.10 kg.MethodsThe study was a randomized Latin square block design. Dogs were randomly assigned to receive hydromorphone hydrochloride 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ or 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ IV (n = 4 dogs) or 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ (n = 6) or 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ (n = 5) SC on separate occasions with a minimum 14-day washout between experiments. Blood was sampled via a vascular access port at serial intervals after drug administration. Serum was analyzed by mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined with computer software.ResultsSerum concentrations of hydromorphone decreased quickly after both routes of administration of either dose. The serum half-life, clearance, and volume of distribution after IV hydromorphone at 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ were 0.57 hours (geometric mean), 106.28 mL minute⁻¹ kg⁻¹, and 5.35 L kg⁻¹, and at 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ were 1.00 hour, 60.30 mL minute⁻¹ kg⁻¹, and 5.23 L kg⁻¹, respectively. The serum half-life after SC hydromorphone at 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ and 0.5 mg kg⁻¹ was 0.66 hours and 1.11 hours, respectively.Conclusions and clinical relevanceHydromorphone has a short half-life, suggesting that frequent dosing intervals are needed. Based on pharmacokinetic parameters calculated in this study, 0.1 mg kg⁻¹ IV or SC q 2 hours or a constant rate infusion of hydromorphone at 0.03 mg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹ are suggested for future studies to assess the analgesic effect of hydromorphone.     

Clinical evaluation of ketamine and lidocaine intravenous infusions to reduce isoflurane requirements in horses under general anaesthesia

ObjectiveTo compare isoflurane alone or in combination with systemic ketamine and lidocaine for general anaesthesia in horses.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded clinical trial.AnimalsForty horses (ASA I-III) undergoing elective surgery.MethodsHorses were assigned to receive isoflurane anaesthesia alone (ISO) or with ketamine and lidocaine (LKI). After receiving romifidine, diazepam, and ketamine, the isoflurane end-tidal concentration was set at 1.3% and subsequently adjusted by the anaesthetist (unaware of treatments) to maintain a light plane of surgical anaesthesia. Animals in the LKI group received lidocaine (1.5 mg kg⁻¹ over 10 minutes, followed by 40 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) and ketamine (60 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹), both reduced to 65% of the initial dose after 50 minutes, and stopped 15 minutes before the end of anaesthesia. Standard clinical cardiovascular and respiratory parameters were monitored. Recovery quality was scored from one (very good) to five (very poor). Differences between ISO and LKI groups were analysed with a two-sample t-test for parametric data or a Fischer's exact test for proportions (p < 0.05 for significance). Results are mean ± SD.ResultsHeart rate was lower (p = 0.001) for LKI (29 ± 4) than for ISO (34 ± 6). End-tidal concentrations of isoflurane (ISO: 1.57% ± 0.22; LKI: 0.97% ± 0.33), the number of horses requiring thiopental (ISO: 10; LKI: 2) or dobutamine (ISO:8; LKI:3), and dobutamine infusion rates (ISO:0.26 ± 0.09; LKI:0.18 ± 0.06 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹) were significantly lower in LKI compared to the ISO group (p < 0.001). No other significant differences were found, including recovery scores.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThese results support the use of lidocaine and ketamine to improve anaesthetic and cardiovascular stability during isoflurane anaesthesia lasting up to 2 hours in mechanically ventilated horses, with comparable quality of recovery.     

Evaluation of analgesic,sympathetic and motor effects of 1% and 2% lidocaine administered epidurally in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy

ObjectiveTo compare, versus a control, the sensory, sympathetic and motor blockade of lidocaine 1% and 2% administered epidurally in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designRandomized, blinded, controlled clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 24 mixed-breed intact female dogs.MethodsAll dogs were administered dexmedetomidine, tramadol and meloxicam prior to general anesthesia with midazolam–propofol and isoflurane. Animals were randomly assigned for an epidural injection of lidocaine 1% (0.4 mL kg⁻¹; group L1), lidocaine 2% (0.4 mL kg⁻¹; group L2) or no injection (group CONTROL). Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pe′CO₂), and invasive systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressures were recorded every 5 minutes. Increases in physiological variables were treated with fentanyl (3 μg kg⁻¹) intravenously (IV). Phenylephrine (1 μg kg⁻¹) was administered IV when MAP was <60 mmHg. Postoperative pain [Glasgow Composite Pain Score – Short Form (GCPS–SF)] and return of normal ambulation were recorded at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 hours after extubation.ResultsThere were no differences over time or among groups for HR, f_R, Pe′CO₂ and SAP. MAP and DAP were lower in epidural groups than in CONTROL (p = 0.0146 and 0.0047, respectively). There was no difference in the use of phenylephrine boluses. More fentanyl was administered in CONTROL than in L1 and L2 (p = 0.011). GCPS–SF was lower for L2 than for CONTROL, and lower in L1 than in both other groups (p = 0.001). Time to ambulation was 2 (1–2) hours in L1 and 3 (2–4) hours in L2 (p = 0.004).Conclusions and clinical relevanceEpidural administration of lidocaine (0.4 mL kg⁻¹) reduced fentanyl requirements and lowered MAP and DAP. Time to ambulation decreased and postoperative pain scores were improved by use of 1% lidocaine compared with 2% lidocaine.     

Assessment of brachial plexus blockade in chickens by an axillary approach

ObjectiveTo assess the brachial plexus block in chickens by an axillary approach and using a peripheral nerve stimulator.Study designProspective, randomized, double-blinded study.AnimalsSix, 84-week old, female chickens.MethodsMidazolam (1 mg kg⁻¹) and butorphanol (1 mg kg⁻¹) were administered into the pectoralis muscle. Fifteen minutes later, the birds were positioned in lateral recumbency and following palpation of the anatomic landmarks, a catheter was inserted using an axillary approach to the brachial plexus. Lidocaine or bupivacaine (1 mL kg⁻¹) was injected after plexus localization by the nerve stimulator. Sensory function was tested before and after blockade (carpus, radius/ulna, humerus and pectoralis muscle) in the blocked and unblocked wings. The latency to onset of motor and sensory block and the duration of sensory block were recorded. A Friedman nonparametric one-way repeated-measures anova was used to compare scores from baseline values over time and to compare the differences between wings at each time point.ResultsA total of 18 blocks were performed with a success rate of 66.6% (12/18). The latency for motor block was 2.8 ± 1.1 and 3.2 ± 0.4 minutes for lidocaine and bupivacaine, respectively. The latencies for and durations of the sensory block were 6.0 ± 2.5 and 64.0 ± 18.0 and 7.8 ± 5.8 and 91.6 ± 61.7 minutes for lidocaine and bupivacaine, respectively. There was no statistical difference between these times for lidocaine or bupivacaine. Sensory function was not abolished in nonblocked wings.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe brachial plexus block was an easy technique to perform but had a high failure rate. It might be useful for providing anesthesia or postoperative analgesia of the wing in chickens and exotic avian species that have similar wing anatomy.     

Total intravenous anesthesia in domestic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) with propofol alone or in combination with methadone,nalbuphine or fentanyl for ulna osteotomy

ObjectiveTo compare the propofol infusion rate and cardiopulmonary effects during total intravenous anesthesia with propofol alone and propofol combined with methadone, fentanyl or nalbuphine in domestic chickens undergoing ulna osteotomy.Study designProspective, randomized, experiment trial.AnimalsA total of 59 healthy Hissex Brown chickens weighing 1.5 ± 0.2 kg.MethodsAnesthesia was induced with propofol (9 mg kg^–1) administered intravenously (IV) and maintained with propofol (1.2 mg kg^–1 minute^–1) for 30 minutes. Birds were intubated and supplemented with 100% oxygen through a nonrebreathing circuit under spontaneous ventilation. Thereafter, each animal was randomly assigned to one of four groups: group P, no treatment; group PM, methadone (6 mg kg^–1) intramuscularly (IM); group PN, nalbuphine IM (12.5 mg kg^–1); and group PF, fentanyl IV (30 μg kg^–1 loading dose, 30 μg kg^–1 hour^–1 constant rate infusion). During the osteotomy surgery, the propofol infusion rate was adjusted to avoid movement of birds and provide adequate anesthesia. Pulse rate, invasive blood pressure, respiratory frequency, end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (Pe′CO₂) and hemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO₂) were recorded.ResultsData were available from 58 chickens. The mean ± standard deviation propofol infusion rate (mg kg^–1 minute^–1) for the duration of anesthesia was: group P, 0.81 ± 0.15; group PM, 0.66 ± 0.11; group PN, 0.60 ± 0.14; and group PF, 0.80 ± 0.07. Significant differences were P versus PM (p = 0.042), P versus PN (p = 0.002) and PF versus PN (p = 0.004). Pulse rate, blood pressure and SpO₂ remained acceptable for anesthetized birds with minor differences among groups. Values of Pe′CO₂ >60 mmHg (8 kPa) were observed in all groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMethadone and nalbuphine, but not fentanyl, decreased the propofol infusion rate required for anesthesia maintenance, but resulted in no obvious benefit in physiological variables.     

Minimum infusion rate and hemodynamic effects of propofol, propofol-lidocaine and propofol-lidocaine-ketamine in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of a constant rate infusion (CRI) of lidocaine alone or in combination with ketamine on the minimum infusion rate (MIR) of propofol in dogs and to compare the hemodynamic effects produced by propofol, propofol-lidocaine or propofol-lidocaine-ketamine anesthesia.Study designProspective, randomized cross-over experimental design.AnimalsFourteen adult mixed-breed dogs weighing 15.8 ± 3.5 kg.MethodsEight dogs were anesthetized on different occasions to determine the MIR of propofol alone and propofol in combination with lidocaine (loading dose [LD] 1.5 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.25 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) or lidocaine (LD 1.5 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.25 mg kg^?1 minute^?1) and ketamine (LD 1 mg kg^?1, CRI 0.1 mg kg^?1 minute^?1). In six other dogs, the hemodynamic effects and bispectral index (BIS) were investigated. Each animal received each treatment (propofol, propofol-lidocaine or propofol-lidocaine-ketamine) on the basis of the MIR of propofol determined in the first set of experiments.ResultsMean ± SD MIR of propofol was 0.51 ± 0.08 mg kg^?1 minute^?1. Lidocaine-ketamine significantly decreased the MIR of propofol to 0.31 ± 0.07 mg kg^?1 minute^?1 (37 ± 18% reduction), although lidocaine alone did not (0.42 ± 0.08 mg kg^?1 minute^?1, 18 ± 7% reduction). Hemodynamic effects were similar in all treatments. Compared with the conscious state, in all treatments, heart rate, cardiac index, mean arterial blood pressure, stroke index and oxygen delivery index decreased significantly, whereas systemic vascular resistance index increased. Stroke index was lower in dogs treated with propofol-lidocaine-ketamine at 30 minutes compared with propofol alone. The BIS was lower during anesthesia with propofol-lidocaine-ketamine compared to propofol alone.Conclusions and clinical relevanceLidocaine-ketamine, but not lidocaine alone, reduced the MIR of propofol in dogs. Neither lidocaine nor lidocaine in combination with ketamine attenuated cardiovascular depression produced by a continuous rate infusion of propofol.     

Use of intravenous lidocaine to treat dexmedetomidine-induced bradycardia in sedated and anesthetized dogs

ObjectiveTo assess cardiopulmonary function in sedated and anesthetized dogs administered intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine and subsequently administered IV lidocaine to treat dexmedetomidine-induced bradycardia.Study designProspective, randomized, crossover experimental trial.AnimalsA total of six purpose-bred female Beagle dogs, weighing 9.1 ± 0.6 kg (mean ± standard deviation).MethodsDogs were randomly assigned to one of three treatments: dexmedetomidine (10 μg kg^–1 IV) administered to conscious (treatments SED1 and SED2) or isoflurane-anesthetized dogs (end-tidal isoflurane concentration 1.19 ± 0.04%; treatment ISO). After 30 minutes, a lidocaine bolus (2 mg kg^–1) IV was administered in treatments SED1 and ISO, followed 20 minutes later by a second bolus (2 mg kg^–1) and a 30 minute lidocaine constant rate infusion (L-CRI) at 50 (SED1) or 100 μg kg^–1 minute^–1 (ISO). In SED2, lidocaine bolus and L-CRI (50 μg kg^–1 minute^–1) were administered 5 minutes after dexmedetomidine. Cardiopulmonary measurements were obtained after dexmedetomidine, after lidocaine bolus, during L-CRI and 30 minutes after discontinuing L-CRI. A mixed linear model was used for comparisons within treatments (p < 0.05).ResultsWhen administered after a bolus of dexmedetomidine, lidocaine bolus and L-CRI significantly increased heart rate and cardiac index, decreased mean blood pressure, systemic vascular resistance index and oxygen extraction ratio, and did not affect stroke volume index in all treatments.Conclusion and clinical relevanceLidocaine was an effective treatment for dexmedetomidine-induced bradycardia in healthy research dogs.     

Postoperative analgesic effects of either a constant rate infusion of fentanyl,lidocaine, ketamine,dexmedetomidine, or the combination lidocaine‐ketamine‐dexmedetomidine after ovariohysterectomy in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the postoperative analgesic effects of a constant rate infusion (CRI) of either fentanyl (FENT), lidocaine (LIDO), ketamine (KET), dexmedetomidine (DEX), or the combination lidocaine-ketamine-dexmedetomidine (LKD) in dogs.Study designRandomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.AnimalsFifty-four dogs.MethodsAnesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Treatments were intravenous (IV) administration of a bolus at start of anesthesia, followed by an IV CRI until the end of anesthesia, then a CRI at a decreased dose for a further 4 hours: CONTROL/BUT (butorphanol 0.4 mg kg⁻¹, infusion rate of saline 0.9% 2 mLkg⁻¹ hour⁻¹); FENT (5 μg kg⁻¹, 10 μg kg⁻¹hour⁻¹, then 2.5 μg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹); KET (1 mgkg⁻¹, 40 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹, then 10 μg kg⁻¹minute⁻¹); LIDO (2 mg kg⁻¹, 100 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹, then 25 μg kg⁻¹ minute⁻¹); DEX (1 μgkg⁻¹, 3 μg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹, then 1 μg kg⁻¹ hour⁻¹); or a combination of LKD at the aforementioned doses. Postoperative analgesia was evaluated using the Glasgow composite pain scale, University of Melbourne pain scale, and numerical rating scale. Rescue analgesia was morphine and carprofen. Data were analyzed using Friedman or Kruskal–Wallis test with appropriate post-hoc testing (p < 0.05).ResultsAnimals requiring rescue analgesia included CONTROL/BUT (n = 8), KET (n = 3), DEX (n = 2), and LIDO (n = 2); significantly higher in CONTROL/BUT than other groups. No dogs in LKD and FENT groups received rescue analgesia. CONTROL/BUT pain scores were significantly higher at 1 hour than FENT, DEX and LKD, but not than KET or LIDO. Fentanyl and LKD sedation scores were higher than CONTROL/BUT at 1 hour.Conclusions and clinical relevanceLKD and FENT resulted in adequate postoperative analgesia. LIDO, CONTROL/BUT, KET and DEX may not be effective for treatment of postoperative pain in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.