Cranial versus caudal thoracic epidural anesthesia using three volumes of lidocaine in conscious Beagle dogs

Objective

To compare the effects of epidural injection of three volumes of lidocaine injected at the third (T3) or eleventh thoracic vertebra (T11) in conscious dogs to induce thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) and to measure the epidural dispersion of iohexol under similar conditions.

The effect of epidural injection speed on epidural pressure and distribution of solution in anesthetized dogs

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of injection speed on epidural pressure (EP), injection pressure (IP), epidural distribution (ED) of solution, and extent of sensory blockade (SB) during lumbosacral epidural anesthesia in dogs.Study designProspective experimental trial.AnimalsTen healthy adult Beagle dogs weighing 8.7 ± 1.6 kg.MethodsGeneral anesthesia was induced with propofol administered intravenously and maintained with isoflurane. Keeping the dogs in sternal recumbency, two spinal needles connected to electrical pressure transducers were inserted into the L6-L7 and the L7-S1 intervertebral epidural spaces for EP and IP measurements, respectively. Bupivacaine 0.5% diluted in iohexol was administered epidurally to each dog via spinal needle at L7-S1 intervertebral space, at two rates of injection (1 and 2 mL minute^?1 groups), with a 1-week washout period. Epidural distribution was verified with computed tomography, and SB was evaluated after arousal by pinching the skin with a mosquito hemostatic forceps over the vertebral dermatomes. The results were analyzed according to each injection speed, using paired t- and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.ResultsMean ± SD of baseline EP and IP values were 2.1 ± 6.1 and 2.6 ± 7.1 mmHg, respectively. Significant differences were observed between 1 and 2 mL minute^?1 groups for peak EP (23.1 ± 8.5 and 35.0 ± 14.5 mmHg, p = 0.047) and peak IP (68.5 ± 10.7 and 144.7 ± 32.6 mmHg, p <0.001). However, the median (range) of the ED, 11.5 (4–22) and 12 (5–21) vertebrae, and SB, 3.5 (0–20) and 1 (0–20) dermatomes, values of the two groups were not related to injection speed.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThe EP profile during injection was measured by separating the injection and pressure monitoring lines. The increase in epidural injection speed increased the EP, but not the ED or the SB in dogs.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Bupivacaine 0.25% and methylene blue spread with epidural anesthesia in dog

ObjectiveTo evaluate the extent sensory and motor blocks produced by the epidural injection of different volumes of 0.25% bupivacaine (Bu) with methylene blue (MB), in dogs.Study designProspective experimental trial.AnimalsTwenty healthy adult mongrel dogs, weighing 9.9 ± 1.9 kg.MethodsDogs were randomly allocated into one of four groups that received 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 or 0.8 mL kg^?1 of an epidural solution containing 0.25% Bu and MB. Sensory block was evaluated against time by pinching the tail, hind limb interdigital web, toenail bases and the skin over the vertebral dermatomes. Motor block was assessed by ataxia, hind limb weight-bearing ability and by loss of muscle tone of the tail and pelvic limbs. Data were collected at 2, 5, 10, 15 and 30 minutes after the end of epidural injection. After the final time point, dogs were euthanatized and laminectomies were conducted to expose the extent of the dural dye staining.ResultsThe volumes 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 mL kg^?1 of 0.25% Bu and MB blocked a mean of 5, 14.2, 20.2 and 21 dermatomes, respectively. The extent of the senory block increased up to a volume of 0.6 mL kg^?1. Motor block was longer-lasting and more intense than sensory block. Complete dyeing of the spinal cord with MB was achieved in some dogs at 0.4 mL kg^?1 and all dogs at 0.6 mL kg^?1.ConclusionsThe volume of anesthetic injected into the epidural space plays an important role in the quality of the epidural anesthesia. At 0.25%, bupivacaine provided an efficient sensory block at 0.6 mL kg^?1.Clinical relevanceRelatively high volumes (0.6 mL kg^?1) of 0.25%, BU and MB were needed to produce an effective sensory and motor block caudal to the umbilicus, but all spinal cord segments were reached by MB at this dose.     

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.     

Combined paravertebral plexus block and parasacral sciatic block in healthy dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of paravertebral lumbar plexus block combined with parasacral sciatic block to anesthetize one hind limb in awake dogs.Study designRandomized, controlled, blinded experimental study.AnimalsEight healthy mongrel dogs weighing 12.4 ± 4.5 kg and aged 7 ± 2.33 years.MethodsAfter sedation with medetomidine, dogs received B1: bupivacaine 0.25%, 0.2 mL kg^?1, B2: bupivacaine 0.5%, 0.2 mL kg^?1, B3: bupivacaine 0.25% 0.4 mL kg^?1, P1: NaCl 0.2 mL kg^?1, P2: NaCl 0.4 mL kg^?1. The lumbosacral plexus was blocked through a paravertebral block of the fourth, fifth and sixth lumbar nerves combined with a parasacral block. The relevant nerves were located using a nerve stimulator and injections of each treatment were administered. Degree and durations of sensory blockade were determined through the response to a Halsted clamp pressure on the skin innervated by the saphenous/femoral and lateral cutaneous femoral nerves (lumbar dermatomes) and by the peroneal and tibial nerves. The degree and duration of motor blockade was assessed evaluating the ability to walk normally and proprioception.ResultsP1 and P2 treatments did not show any grade of sensory or motor blockade. The B2 treatment produced a higher degree of sensory blockade compared to B1 and B3 for both lumbar and sciatic dermatomes. There was no significant difference in the degree of sensory blockade comparing B1 to B3. The B2 treatment had greater motor blockade compared to B1 and B3. The duration of sensory and motor blockade was longer in B2 compared to B1 and B3.Conclusion and clinical relevanceWhen the nerve stimulator is used to perform the lumbosacral plexus block, the concentration of the bupivacaine has a more important role than the volume to produce a more solid and longer block.     

Evaluation of perfusion index as a noninvasive tool to determine epidural anesthesia effectiveness in dogs

ObjectiveTo evaluate perfusion index (PI) as a noninvasive tool to determine effectiveness and onset of epidural anesthesia in dogs.Study designProspective clinical trial.AnimalsA total of 21 adult dogs, aged 6.5 ± 3 years and weighing 34.9 ± 6.4 kg, undergoing a tibial plateau leveling osteotomy.MethodsDogs were premedicated intramuscularly with acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^–1) and hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg^–1) and anesthetized with intravenous propofol (to effect) and isoflurane in oxygen. A surface transflectance probe was secured to the tail base to monitor PI and a dorsal pedal artery catheter was placed for invasive blood pressure monitoring. A lumbosacral epidural was performed with the dog in sternal recumbency. Dogs were randomly assigned for inclusion of epidural morphine (0.1 mg kg^–1) or morphine (0.1 mg kg^–1) and lidocaine (4 mg kg^–1). PI was recorded following instrumentation of each dog just prior to the epidural (baseline), at 10 minute intervals for 30 minutes, before and after the surgical skin incision and before and after completion of the osteotomy. Physiological variables and end-tidal isoflurane were recorded at the same time points.ResultsThere was no significant difference in PI between the groups at any time point. There was a significant change in end-tidal isoflurane before and after the skin incision in the epidural morphine and epidural morphine–lidocaine groups (p = 0.04, p = 0.05, respectively) and before and after the osteotomy in each group for heart rate (p = 0.001, p = 0.04), diastolic (p = 0.01, p = 0.01) and mean arterial blood pressure (p = 0.03, p = 0.05).Conclusions and clinical relevancePI did not provide an objective means for determining the onset or effectiveness of epidural anesthesia in anesthetized dogs and alternate methods of noninvasive assessment should be investigated.     

Effect of phentolamine mesylate on regression of lidocaine–epinephrine epidural anaesthesia in sheep

ObjectiveTo determine the impact of epidural phentolamine on the duration of anaesthesia following epidural injection of lidocaine–epinephrine.Study designBlinded randomized experimental study.AnimalsA group of 12 adult ewes weighing 25.7 ± 2.3 kg and aged 8–9 months.MethodsAll sheep were administered epidural lidocaine (approximately 4 mg kg^–1) and epinephrine (5 μg mL^–1). Of these, six sheep were randomized into three epidural treatments, separated by 1 week, administered 30 minutes after lidocaine–epinephrine: SAL: normal saline, PHE1: phentolamine (1 mg) and PHE2: phentolamine (2 mg). The other six sheep were administered only epidural lidocaine–epinephrine: treatment LIDEP. Each injection was corrected to 5 mL using 0.9% saline. Noxious stimuli were pinpricks with a hypodermic needle and skin pinch with haemostatic forceps to determine the onset and duration of sensory and motor block. Heart rate, noninvasive mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate and rectal temperature were recorded.ResultsThe onset times were not different among treatments. Duration of sensory block was significantly shorter in SAL (57.5 ± 6.2 minutes), PHE1 (60.7 ± 9.0 minutes) and PHE2 (62.0 ± 6.7 minutes) than in LIDEP (81.7 ± 13.4 minutes) (p < 0.05). Duration of motor blockade was significantly shorter in PHE1 (59.4 ± 5.4 minutes) and PHE2 (54.3 ± 4.0 minutes) than in SAL (84.8 ± 7.0 minutes) and LIDEP (91.5 ± 18.2 minutes) (p < 0.01). MAP in PHE2 was decreased at 10 minutes after administration of phentolamine (p < 0.05).Conclusion and clinical relevanceEpidural administration of 5 mL normal saline after epidural injection of lidocaine–epinephrine reduced the duration of sensory but not motor block in sheep. Epidural administration of phentolamine diluted to the final volume of 5 mL diminished both the duration of sensory and motor block in sheep administered epidural lidocaine–epinephrine.     

Comparative analgesic and sedative effects of tramadol,tramadol‐lidocaine and lidocaine for caudal epidural analgesia in donkeys (Equus asinus)

ObjectiveTo compare anti-nociceptive and sedative effects of tramadol, a combination of tramadol-lidocaine, and lidocaine alone for perineal analgesia in donkeys.Study designExperimental ‘blinded’ randomized cross-over study.AnimalsSix healthy adult donkeys.MethodsTreatments were tramadol (TR) (1.0 mg kg⁻¹), tramadol-lidocaine (TRLD) (0.5 and 0.2 mg kg⁻¹ respectively) and lidocaine (LD) (0.4 mg kg⁻¹) given into the epidural space. The volume of all treatments was 0.02 mL kg⁻¹. Nociception was tested at the perineal region by pin prick, followed, if no reaction, by pressure from a haemostat clamp. Times to onset, degree and duration of anti-nociception of the perineal region were recorded. Response was tested immediately after drug administration and at: 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes post-administration and then at 30 minute intervals thereafter until a response re-occurred. Physiologic data and degree of sedation and ataxia were recorded pre-administration and at intervals for 240 minutes post-administration. Results were analyzed using anova, Kruskal–Wallis tests, and Wilks’ Lambda test as relevant. Significance was taken as p < 0.05.ResultsTimes (minutes, mean ± SD) to onset and duration of anti-nociception, respectively were; TR 13 ± 1.6 and 220 ± 4.6; TRLD 6 ± 0.8 and 180 ± 8.5; LD 4 ± 1.4 and 75 ± 4. Onset and duration times were significantly longer with TR than the other two treatments. TR never produced complete anti-nociception, whereas the TRLD and LD induced complete anti-nociceptive effects. Duration was significantly longer with TRLD than with LD alone. Epidural injections of TR and TRLD induced mild sedation.Conclusions and clinical relevanceEpidural combination of TRLD produced an anti-nociceptive effect in the perineum, which was rapid in onset and had a longer duration of action than LD alone. An epidural single dose of TRLD combination would appear to provide an acceptable analgesic effect in the perineal region of donkeys.     

Antinociceptive effects of epidural magnesium sulphate alone and in combination with morphine in dogs

ObjectiveTo compare the antinociceptive effects of magnesium sulphate (MgSO₄) when administered epidurally alone and in combination with morphine.Study designExperimental, randomized, ‘blinded’, crossover study.AnimalsSix healthy adult Beagle dogs.MethodsEvaluated treatments were MgSO₄ (2.5 mg kg⁻¹) alone (Mg), morphine (0.1 mg kg⁻¹) alone (Mo), MgSO₄ in combination with morphine (Mm), and sterile water (0.115 mL kg⁻¹; Co) that were injected in the lumbosacral epidural space using an epidural catheter. Antinociception was measured using the von Frey mechanical threshold device applied to the carpal pads, both sides of the thorax and metatarsi. Measurements were obtained at time points: before treatment (baseline) and 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the epidural injection. Sedation, behaviour score and presence of motor deficits were assessed. Data were analyzed using a linear mixed model and Bonferroni adjustments, with significance set at p < 0.05.ResultsThere were significant effects of treatment and time in all regions. Overall threshold values in grammes force [median (interquartile range)] when stimulation regions were combined were significantly higher in Mg [164 (135–200)], Mo [156 (129–195)] and Mm [158 (131–192)] compared to Co [145 (120–179)]. Thresholds were significantly higher compared to Co in Mg, Mo and Mm at the thorax and metatarsi, but only in Mg and Mo at the carpal pads. No motor deficits were observed at any time point. Thresholds (combined regions) were increased from baseline at one or more time points with all treatments, including control.Conclusion and clinical relevanceEpidural MgSO₄ produced an antinociceptive effect characterised by an increase in the mechanical thresholds of similar magnitude to that produced by epidural morphine, compared with the control group, without causing any motor deficits. No potentiation of morphine antinociception was observed. The onset and offset times of antinociception could not be clearly established. To what extent these results can be extrapolated to clinical cases requires further investigation.     

Comparative analgesic and cardiopulmonary effects of bupivacaine and ropivacaine in the epidural space of the conscious dog

Objective To compare the cardiopulmonary effects and sensory blockade of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine. Study Design Prospective randomized study. Animals Six young adult medium‐sized crossbred dogs weighing 25.7 ± 7.1 kg. Method Dogs were chronically implanted with a lumbosacral epidural catheter. Acepromazine sedated dogs received all treatments: 0.5% bupivacaine at 0.14 mL kg^?1 (LB5) or 0.22 mL kg^?1 (HB5); 0.5% ropivacaine at 0.14 mL kg^?1 (LR5) or 0.22 mL kg^?1 (HR5); 0.75% bupivacaine at 0.22 mL kg^?1 (HB7.5) or 0.75% ropivacaine at 0.22 mL kg^?1 (HR7.5). Loss of sensation was tested at the level of the perineum, hind toe webs, flank, and caudodorsal rib areas before injection, and post‐injection (PI) up to 150 minutes PI. Systemic arterial blood pressure and heart rate were recorded before injection, and every 10 minutes PI until 150 minutes PI. Arterial blood gas analyses were performed prior to injection, and at 30, 60 and 150 minutes PI. Results No statistical differences existed between groups for the cardiopulmonary data or time to onset of block. Group HR7.5 had lower systolic (10–70 minutes PI) and diastolic (10–70 minutes PI) blood pressures and group HR5 had lower mean (10–90 minutes PI) and diastolic (10–90 minutes PI) blood pressures compared to baseline. Heart rate was lower compared to baseline in groups LR5 and HB7.5. A significant, but mild metabolic acidosis developed in groups LR5 and HB7.5 (150 minutes PI). No differences were present for the duration of block between groups, but duration of block in the dorsocaudal rib area was shorter in group HR5 compared to HR7.5. Conclusion Epidural ropivacaine and bupivacaine at the doses used have mild effects on the cardiopulmonary system, and extent of block are similar. Clinical Relevance The 0.75% concentration of bupivacaine and ropivacaine at 0.22 mL kg^?1 appeared to contribute to greater success of block (>80%) at dermatomes L₅–L₇.     

Preperitoneal ropivacaine infusion versus epidural ropivacaine–morphine for postoperative analgesia in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy: a randomized clinical trial

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of continuous wound infusion (CWI) with preperitoneal ropivacaine on postoperative analgesia and compare it with the epidural administration of ropivacaine and morphine in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy.Study designA parallel, randomized, clinical, prospective and nonblinded study.AnimalsA group of 38 Greyhound bitches.MethodsIn the catheter group (CathG), CWI with ropivacaine 1% (1 mg kg^–1 + 0.8 mg kg^–1 hour^–1) was applied to the preperitoneal space over the surgical incision. In the epidural group (EpiG), ropivacaine 0.5% (1.3 mg kg^–1) and morphine (0.1 mg kg^–1) were epidurally administered. Occipital-coccygeal length was used to calculate the volume for the epidural. Pain was scored using a dynamic interactive visual analogue scale (DIVAS) and Glasgow composite measure pain scale–short form (CMPS-SF) before anaesthesia and at 2, 4, 6, 18, 21 and 24 hours after extubation. Incisional sensitivity using a dynamometer (MWTs-incision) was evaluated simultaneously. Plasma ropivacaine and cortisol concentrations, degree of sedation, motor blockade and response to interdigital clamping were measured or assessed. A two-way mixed analysis of variance and a Mann–Whitney U test were used to analyse data; p < 0.05.ResultsNo differences were detected in the DIVAS (p = 0.301), CMPS-SF (p = 0.600) scores, MWTs-incision measurements (p = 0.257) and cortisol values (p = 0.878) between the groups. Rescue analgesia was required in two dogs, one in each group, at 2 hours. Sedation, motor blockade and negative response to interdigital clamping were detected in EpiG at 2, 4 and 6 hours. Mean plasma ropivacaine values were higher in CathG (0.475 ± 0.164 ng mL^–1) than in EpiG (0.184 ± 0.213 ng mL^–1; p = 0.001).Conclusion and clinical relevanceCompared with epidural ropivacaine and morphine, CWI with preperitoneal ropivacaine is an effective analgesic technique for postoperative pain management in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy without motor blockade.     

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.     

Evaluation of a regional nerve block with an experimental formulation of encapsulated lidocaine in sheep

ObjectiveTo compare the duration of nociceptive and proprioceptive blockade from an experimental encapsulated lidocaine preparation with that of conventional lidocaine.Study designProspective, blinded, randomly assigned, crossover study.AnimalsA total of six adult Dorset ewes, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, weighing 60.4 ± 18.0 kg (mean ± standard deviation).MethodsUnder general anesthesia and guided by electrolocation, the common peroneal nerve was blocked unilaterally with encapsulated lidocaine (0.1 mL kg^–1, 200 mg mL^–1) or conventional lidocaine hydrochloride (0.1 mL kg^–1, 20 mg mL^–1). Each sheep was administered both treatments with an interval of 2 weeks between treatments. Nociception and proprioception were scored (scales of 0–3) before anesthesia, at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours after completion of local anesthetic injection, and every 12 hours thereafter for 9 days. Nociceptive and proprioceptive blockade ended the first time each score reached ‘0’; maximum blockade duration was considered and recorded to be the time point immediately prior to this end point. Significance of differences between treatments for duration of blockade was tested with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Effects of time and treatment on nociceptive and proprioceptive blockade were evaluated with mixed-effect models. Significance was set at p < 0.05.ResultsCompared with conventional lidocaine, nociceptive blockade lasted 88 hours longer with encapsulated lidocaine (p = 0.008), and proprioceptive blockade lasted 6 hours longer (p = 0.03). Significant effects of time (p < 0.0001), treatment (p = 0.0435) and treatment1time (p < 0.0001) were observed for nociception. Significant effects of time (p < 0.0001) and treatment1time (p = 0.0058) were observed for proprioception.ConclusionEncapsulated lidocaine produced nociceptive blockade with a duration substantially longer than conventional lidocaine.Clinical relevanceSustained-release encapsulated lidocaine alleviates pain and may minimize systemic analgesic use.     

Evaluation of analgesic and physiologic effects of epidural morphine administered at a thoracic or lumbar level in dogs undergoing thoracotomy

ObjectiveTo evaluate the analgesic and physiological effects of epidural morphine administered at the sixth and seventh lumbar or the fifth and sixth thoracic vertebrae in dogs undergoing thoracotomy.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded trial.AnimalsFourteen mixed-breed dogs, weighing 8.6 ± 1.4 kg.MethodsThe animals received acepromazine (0.1 mg kg^?1) IM and anesthesia was induced with propofol (4 mg kg^?1) IV. The lumbosacral space was punctured and an epidural catheter was inserted up to the region between the sixth and seventh lumbar vertebrae (L, n = 6) or up to the fifth or sixth intercostal space (T, n = 8). The dogs were allowed to recover and after radiographic confirmation of correct catheter position, anesthesia was reinduced with propofol IV and maintained with 1.7% isoflurane. Following stabilization of monitored parameters, animals received morphine (0.1 mg kg^?1) diluted in 0.9% NaCl to a final volume of 0.25 mL kg^?1 via the epidural catheter, and after 40 minutes, thoracotomy was initiated. Heart rate and rhythm, systolic, mean and diastolic arterial pressures, respiratory rate, arterial hemoglobin oxygen saturation, partial pressure of expired CO₂ and body temperature were measured immediately before the epidural administration of morphine (0 minute) and every 10 minutes during the anesthetic period. The Melbourne pain scale and the visual analog scale were used to assess post-operative pain. The evaluation began 3 hours after the epidural administration of morphine and occurred each hour until rescue analgesia.ResultsThere were no important variations in the physiological parameters during the anesthetic period. The post-operative analgesic period differed between the groups, being longer in T (9.9 ± 1.6 hours) compared with L (5.8 ± 0.8 hours).ConclusionsThe use of morphine, at a volume of 0.25 mL kg^?1, administered epidurally over the thoracic vertebrae provided longer lasting analgesia than when deposited over the lumbar vertebrae.Clinical relevanceThe deposition of epidural morphine provided longer lasting analgesia when administered near to the innervation of the injured tissue without increasing side effects.     

Clinical efficacy of dexmedetomidine combined with lidocaine for femoral and sciatic nerve blocks in dogs undergoing stifle surgery

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine administered perineurally or intramuscularly (IM) on sensory, motor function and postoperative analgesia produced by lidocaine for sciatic and femoral nerve blocks in dogs undergoing unilateral tibial tuberosity advancement surgery.Study designProspective, blinded, clinical study.AnimalsA group of 30 dogs.MethodsDogs were anaesthetized with acepromazine, propofol and isoflurane in oxygen/air. Electrolocation-guided femoral and sciatic nerve blocks were performed: group L, 0.15 mL kg^–1 2% lidocaine (n = 10); group LD_loc, lidocaine and 0.15 μg kg^–1 dexmedetomidine perineurally (n = 10); group LD_sys, lidocaine and 0.3 μg kg^–1 dexmedetomidine IM (n = 10). After anaesthesia, sensory blockade was evaluated by response to forceps pinch on skin innervated by the saphenous/femoral, common fibular and tibial nerves. Motor blockade was evaluated by observing the ability to walk and proprioception. Analgesia was monitored with Short Form of Glasgow Composite Pain Scale for up to 4 hours after extubation. Methadone IM was administered as rescue analgesia. Data were analysed by linear mixed effect models and Kaplan-Meier test (p < 0.05).ResultsMedian duration of the sensory blockade for all nerves was longer (p < 0.001) for group LD_loc than for groups L and LD_sys and was longer (p = 0.0011) for group LD_sys than for group L. Proprioception returned later (p < 0.001) for group LD_loc [285 (221–328) minutes] compared with group L [160 (134–179) minutes] or LD_sys [195 (162–257) minutes]. Return of the ability to walk was similar among all groups. Dogs in group LD_loc required postoperative rescue analgesia later (p = 0.001) than dogs in groups LD_sys and L.Conclusions and clinical relevanceDexmedetomidine administered perineurally with lidocaine prolonged sensory blockade and analgesia during the immediate postoperative period. Systemic dexmedetomidine also prolonged the sensory blockade of perineural lidocaine.     

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

ObjectiveTo determine the cardiovascular effects of lidocaine infused intravenously (IV) in broiler chickens.Study designTwo phase study: Phase 1, randomized up-and-down study to determine effective dose 50 (ED₅₀) for lidocaine; Phase 2, prospective randomized study to determine the cardiovascular effects of lidocaine.AnimalsSeventeen Ross-708 broiler chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) [11 chickens (Phase 1) and 6 chickens (Phase 2)], weighing 2.6–4.3 kg.MethodsAfter induction of anesthesia with isoflurane and placement of monitoring equipment including invasive blood pressure, chickens were administered lidocaine IV. During Phase 1, using an up-and-down design, each animal received a variable dose selected based on the response of the previous animal. During Phase 2, each animal was administered 6 mg kg⁻¹ of lidocaine IV over 2 minutes. Clinically irrelevant cardiovascular effects were defined as a relative decrease of heart rate (HR) and mean blood pressure (MAP) <30% subsequent to IV lidocaine administration. The ED₅₀ was defined as the dose rate that would cause clinically irrelevant cardiovascular depression in 50% of the population.ResultsDuring Phase 1, using an up-and-down study design (n = 11), the ED₅₀ of lidocaine was determined to be 6.30 mg kg⁻¹ and 6.22 mg kg⁻¹ (95% confidence interval, 5.30–7.13 mg kg⁻¹), when calculated by Dixon's up-and-down method, and logistic regression, respectively. During Phase 2, following infusion of lidocaine (6 mg kg⁻¹), no clinically relevant effects on HR or MAP were detected in any animal.Conclusions and clinical relevancePrevious reports state that the dose of lidocaine used in birds should be =4 mg kg⁻¹. In this study, 6 mg kg⁻¹ of lidocaine injected IV was not associated with adverse cardiovascular effects. These results suggest that the dose of 4 mg kg⁻¹ can be exceeded, at least in chickens, and opens the possibility of other therapeutic uses for lidocaine in birds.     

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.