Responses to an intra-articular lipopolysaccharide challenge following dietary supplementation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product in young horses

Dietary intervention may be a valuable strategy to optimize the intra-articular environment in young horses to prolong their performance career. To test the hypothesis that dietary supplementation of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product would reduce markers of joint inflammation and increase markers of cartilage metabolism following a single inflammatory insult, Quarter Horse yearlings (mean ± SD; 9 ± 1.0 mo) were balanced by age, sex, body weight (BW), and farm of origin and randomly assigned to the following treatment groups: 1.25% BW/d (dry matter basis) custom-formulated concentrate only (CON; n = 9) or concentrate top-dressed with 21 g/d S. cerevisiae fermentation product (SCFP; n = 10) for 98 d. Horses had ad libitum access to Coastal bermudagrass hay. On day 84, one randomly selected radial carpal joint from each horse was injected with 0.5 ng lipopolysaccharide (LPS) solution. The remaining carpal joint was injected with sterile lactated Ringer’s solution as a contralateral control. Synovial fluid obtained before supplementation (day 0) and on day 84 at preinjection hour 0 and 6, 12, 24, 168, and 336 h postinjection was analyzed for prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂), carboxypropeptide of type II collagen (CPII), and collagenase cleavage neopeptide (C2C) by commercial assays. Rectal temperature, heart rate, respiration rate, carpal surface temperature, and carpal circumference were recorded prior to each sample collection and for 24 h postinjection. Data were analyzed using linear models with repeated measures. From day 0 to 84, synovial C2C declined (P ≤ 0.01) and the CPII:C2C ratio increased (P ≤ 0.01) in all horses with no effect of diet. In response to intra-articular LPS, synovial PGE₂ increased by hour 6 (P ≤ 0.01) and returned to baseline by hour 336; CPII increased by hour 12, remained elevated through hour 168 (P ≤ 0.01), and returned to baseline by hour 336; and C2C increased by hour 6 (P ≤ 0.01) but did not return to baseline through hour 336 (P ≤ 0.01). Post-intra-articular injection, PGE₂ levels were lower in SCFP than CON horses (P = 0.01) regardless of injection type. Synovial CPII and the CPII:C2C ratio demonstrated stability during the LPS challenge in SCFP compared with CON horses (P ≤ 0.01). Clinical parameters were not influenced by diet but increased in response to repeated arthrocentesis (P ≤ 0.01). Dietary SCFP may favorably modulate intra-articular inflammation following an acute stressor and influence cartilage turnover in young horses.     

Comparison of propofol with ketofol,a propofol‐ketamine admixture,for induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs

ObjectiveTo compare anaesthetic induction in healthy dogs using propofol or ketofol (a propofol-ketamine mixture).Study designProspective, randomized, controlled, ‘blinded’ study.AnimalsSeventy healthy dogs (33 males and 37 females), aged 6–157 months and weighing 4–48 kg.MethodsFollowing premedication, either propofol (10 mg mL^?1) or ketofol (9 mg propofol and 9 mg ketamine mL^?1) was titrated intravenously until laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were possible. Pulse rate (PR), respiratory rate (f_R) and arterial blood pressure (ABP) were compared to post-premedication values and time to first breath (TTFB) recorded. Sedation quality, tracheal intubation and anaesthetic induction were scored by an observer who was unaware of treatment group. Mann–Whitney or t-tests were performed and significance set at p = 0.05.ResultsInduction mixture volume (mean ± SD) was lower for ketofol (0.2 ± 0.1 mL kg^?1) than propofol (0.4 ± 0.1 mL kg^?1) (p < 0.001). PR increased following ketofol (by 35 ± 20 beats minute^?1) but not consistently following propofol (4 ± 16 beats minute^?1) (p < 0.001). Ketofol administration was associated with a higher mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (82 ± 10 mmHg) than propofol (77 ± 11) (p = 0.05). TTFB was similar, but ketofol use resulted in a greater decrease in f_R (median (range): ketofol -32 (-158 to 0) propofol -24 (-187 to 2) breaths minute^?1) (p < 0.001). Sedation was similar between groups. Tracheal intubation and induction qualities were better with ketofol than propofol (p = 0.04 and 0.02 respectively).Conclusion and clinical relevanceInduction of anaesthesia with ketofol resulted in higher PR and MAP than when propofol was used, but lower f_R. Quality of induction and tracheal intubation were consistently good with ketofol, but more variable when using propofol.