The efficacy and safety of levobupivacaine administered by lumbosacral epidural route in conscious sheep

An Exploration of Analgesia Options for Australian Sheep

During their lifetime, sheep undergo many painful husbandry and disease processes. Procedures undertaken on the farm, such as tail docking, castration, and mulesing, all cause considerable pain. In addition, sheep may experience painful diseases and injuries that require treatment by veterinary practitioners, and in biomedical research, sheep may undergo painful experimental procedures or conditions. It is important due to ethics, animal welfare, social licence, and, at times, legal requirements for farmers, veterinary practitioners, and researchers to provide pain relief for animals in their care. While there is a heightened awareness of and a greater interest in animal welfare, there remain few licensed and known analgesia options for sheep within Australia. A literature review was undertaken to identify currently known and potential future options for analgesic agents in sheep in farm and biomedical settings. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, opioids, local anaesthetics, α2 adrenoreceptor agonists, and NMDA receptor antagonists are some of the more common classes of analgesic drugs referred to in the literature, but few drugs are registered for use in sheep, with even fewer proven to be effective. Only six analgesic product formulations, namely, lignocaine (e.g., Numocaine®), Tri-Solfen®, ketamine, xylazine, and meloxicam (oral transmucosal and injectable formulations), are currently registered in Australia and known to be efficacious in some types of painful conditions in sheep. The gap in knowledge and availability of analgesia in sheep can pose risks to animal welfare, social licence, and research outcomes. This article presents a summary of analgesic agents that have been used in sheep on farms and in clinical veterinary and biomedical research settings along with details on whether their efficacy was assessed, doses, routes of administration, indication for use, and pain assessment techniques (if any) used. The outcome of this research highlights the challenges, gaps, and opportunities for better analgesia options in sheep.

Three Studies Evaluating the Potential for Lidocaine, Bupivacaine or Procaine to Reduce Pain-Related Behaviors following Ring Castration and/or Tail Docking in Lambs

Simple Summary

Lambs are routinely castrated and/or tail docked. Local anesthesia could improve lamb welfare, but data on the duration of effect of local anesthetics are not available. This study evaluated the efficacy of lidocaine, procaine, or bupivacaine in terms of the behavioral response to castration and/or tail docking. The benefits of local anesthetics were modest. The effects of procaine appear to last longer than lidocaine, while bupivacaine is slower to take effect but may provide longer-lasting pain relief. The duration of action of local anesthetics is limited in sheep, and detailed behavioral evaluations are required in the first hour post-procedure to observe efficacy.

Abstract

The use of local anesthesia at the time of ring castration and tail docking can improve lamb welfare. However, few local anesthetics are registered for sheep, and data on their duration of effect is limited. Three studies were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of procaine (P), lidocaine (L), and bupivacaine (B) in terms of observed alleviation of behavioral responses to castration and/or tail docking in 10-min blocks in the first 60 min post-treatment. In each study, comparisons were made between two groups of lambs castrated and/or tail docked with rubber rings and either receiving the agent using the NUMNUTS^® instrument (N) or receiving no anesthetic agent (RR). Acute pain behavior was lower in NL (n = 28) than RRL (n = 15) males in the first 10 min post-procedure (p < 0.05); lower in NB (n = 16) than RRB (n = 16) males in periods 10–20 min (0.05 < p < 0.01), 20–30 min (p < 0.05) and 40–50 min (0.05 < p < 0.01); lower in NB (n = 16) than RRB (n = 16) females between 20 and 40 min post-procedure (0.05 < p < 0.01); lower in NP (n = 8) than RRP (n = 7) males in period 10–20 min (0.05 < p < 0.01), and lower in NP (n = 9) than RRP (n = 9) females in periods 0–10 min (0.05 < p < 0.01), and 10–40 min (p < 0.05). Benefits were modest, and the effects of procaine appear to last longer than lidocaine, while bupivacaine is slower to take effect than either procaine or lidocaine but may provide longer-lasting pain relief. The duration of action of local anesthetics is short in sheep, and detailed behavioral evaluations are required in the first hour post-procedure to establish efficacy.

Analgesia for Sheep in Commercial Production: Where to Next?

Simple Summary

Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on industry to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Although a number of analgesic solutions are now available for sheep, providing some amelioration of the acute pain responses, this review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

Abstract

Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on livestock production industries to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Over the past 15–20 years, there has been considerable research effort to understand and develop mitigation strategies for painful husbandry procedures in sheep, leading to the successful launch of analgesic approaches specific to sheep in a number of countries. However, even with multi-modal approaches to analgesia, using both local anaesthetic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), pain is not obliterated, and the challenge of pain mitigation and phasing out of painful husbandry practices remains. It is timely to review and reflect on progress to date in order to strategically focus on the most important challenges, and the avenues which offer the greatest potential to be incorporated into industry practice in a process of continuous improvement. A structured, systematic literature search was carried out, incorporating peer-reviewed scientific literature in the period 2000–2019. An enormous volume of research is underway, testament to the fact that we have not solved the pain and analgesia challenge for any species, including our own. This review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

Distribution of methylene blue after injection into the epidural space of anaesthetized pregnant and non-pregnant sheep

The aim of the study was to determine the distribution of different volumes of methylene blue solution injected into the epidural space in anaesthetized pregnant and non-pregnant sheep, to evaluate its cranial distribution and to compare between them. Fifteen pregnant and fifteen non-pregnant sheep were included in the study. Sheep were anaesthetized and received 0.05, 0.1, or 0.2 mL/kg of a lumbosacral epidural solution containing 0.12% methylene blue in 0.9% saline. Thirty minutes after the epidural injection, the ewes were euthanized. The extension of the dye within the epidural space was measured, and the correlation between the volume of the dye injected and the number of stained vertebrae was evaluated. The cranial migration of the dye between pregnant and non-pregnant sheep was also compared. The results show that the volume of methylene blue injected epidurally into pregnant and non-pregnant sheep correlated directly with its cephalic distribution into the epidural space; and a volume of 0.1 mL/kg or 0.2 mL/kg stained up to the first lumbar segment in pregnant and non-pregnant sheep, respectively. Also, the results suggest that the volume of drugs administered into the epidural space of pregnant sheep should be half the volume that would be used in non-pregnant sheep.

Comparison of Two Doses of Ropivacaine Hydrochloride for Lumbosacral Epidural Anaesthesia in Goats Undergoing Laparoscopy Assisted Embryo Transfer

Goats (n = 12) undergoing laparoscopy assisted embryo transfer were randomly allotted to two groups (I and II) and injected same volume of ropivacaine hydrochloride at 1.0 mg/kg and 0.5 mg/kg body weight, respectively, at the lumbosacral epidural space. The hind quarters of all the animals were lifted up for the first 3.0 minutes following injection. Immediately after induction the animals were restrained in dorsal recumbency in Trendelenburg position in a cradle. Laparoscopy was performed after achieving pneumoperitoneum using filtered room air. Regional analgesia and changes in physiological parameters were recorded. The mean induction time in animals of group I (n = 6) was 12.666 ± 1.994 minutes. In these animals the analgesia extended up to the umbilical region and lasted for 60 minutes. Only two animals in group II were satisfactorily induced in 11.333 ± 2.333 minutes. In animals of group I, the time taken for regaining the full motor power was significantly long (405 ± 46.314 min) when compared to group II goats (95 ± 9.219 min). From this study it was concluded that ropivacaine did not produce adequate analgesia in most of the goats at 0.5 mg/kg. When used at 1.0 mg/kg, it produced satisfactory regional analgesia lasting for one hour but the prolonged motor loss precludes its use. Additional studies using ropivacaine hydrochloride at doses in between the two extremes used here may be undertaken before recommending it for lumbosacral anaesthesia in goats undergoing laparoscopy.