Intranasal dexmedetomidine in healthy beagles: An echocardiographic and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study

Intranasal atomized dexmedetomidine alone or in combination with ketamine or midazolam to sedate healthy dogs

A prospective, randomized, blinded experiment was conducted to compare the effects of intranasal (IN) dexmedetomidine (Dex, 10 µg/kg; n=12) alone or combined with midazolam (DexM, 0.3 mg/kg; n=12) or ketamine (DexK, 2 mg/kg; n=12) in healthy dogs. Ease of administration (EA1), total administration time (TAT), time for first (TA1) and second nostril administration (TA2), and adverse events during atomization were recorded. Two days later, EA2 was assessed by IN atomization of injectable water as an additional outcome variable. Onset of sedation was evaluated, along with behavioral scores and physiological parameters from T0 (baseline) to T120. Statistical analyses included Chi-square, one-way ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis, repeated measures or Friedman's ANOVA, and Wilcoxon's tests. Significance was p≤0.05. Onset of sedation was 12.9 ± 4.1, 18.2 ± 7.5, and 9.9 ± 4.3 mins (mean ± SD) for Dex, DexM, and DexK, respectively. Onset was shorter in DexK compared to DexM (p=0.002), explaining the lower behavioral scores in DexM at T15. All dogs in Dex and DexK reached adequate sedation, with peak sedation occurring at T30, while some dogs in DexM never reached adequate sedation and this group peaked at T45. Adverse events such as saliva drooling and pawing at the nose were significantly higher in DexM and DexK, explaining their differences in TA2, TAT, and EA1 comparing to Dex. EA2 was also higher in Dex compared to DexM and DexK. In conclusion, Dex was better tolerated in dogs and DexK showed faster and more profound sedative effects. Due to paradoxical excitement, unpredictable sedation, and nasal irritation, DexM is not recommended.

Clinical Effects and Pharmacokinetic Profile of Intramuscular Dexmedetomidine (10 μg/kg) in Cats

This study investigated the pharmacokinetic profile of and pharmacodynamic response to dexmedetomidine administered intramuscularly (IM) at a dose of 10 μg/kg in healthy cats. Nine adult cats were evaluated before and after administration of the drug, with serial collections of plasma samples. Dexmedetomidine induced deep sedation, with a rapid onset of action and a duration of one hour, reaching a peak between 20 and 30 min after administration. The half-life (T½) was 70.2 ± 48 min, with a maximum concentration (Cmax) of 2.2 ± 1.9 ng/mL and time to reach maximum concentration (Tmax) of 26.4 ± 19.8 min. The area under the curve (AUC) was 167.1 ± 149.1 ng/mL*min, with a volume of distribution (Vd) of 2159.9 ± 3237.8 mL/kg and clearance (Cl) of 25.8 ± 33.0 mL/min/kg. There was a reduction in heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) in relation to the baseline, with a slight decrease in systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean (MAP) blood pressure in the first hour. Blood glucose increased after 60 min. Dexmedetomidine proved to be effective and safe, with rapid absorption, metabolization, and elimination, promoting good sedation with minimal adverse effects after IM administration in healthy cats.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous dexmedetomidine (2 μg∙kg-1) in dogs

This study assessed the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of low-dose dexmedetomidine after IV bolus in dogs. Six healthy adult dogs (6.8 ± 3.0 kg) received dexmedetomidine (2 μg.kg-1 IV) over 2 min, using an infusion pump. Blood samples were collected totaling 5 h of monitoring. A validated UHPLC-MS/MS method was used to determine the plasma concentration of dexemedetomidine. For pharmacodynamics, HR, RR, oscillometric MBP, Grint END sedation score were evaluated at baseline (T0), every 3 min (T3 to T21), and after 30 (T30) and 60 (T60) minutes, with p < 0.05. T1/2 was 28.28 ± 6.14 min; the area under the curve was 467.44 ± 60.42 ng/mL/min. The total clearance was 5.46 ± 0.41 mL/min/kg, the Vdss was 146.19 ± 21.04 mL/kg, and the C max was 3.13 ± 1.15 ng/mL. HR (bpm) decreased significantly from T6 (79 ± 21) to T21 (78 ± 31) compared to T0 (116 ± 28). RR(mpm) decreased from T3 (43 ± 44) to T60 (41 ± 23), with T0 being 70 ± 48. The MBP (mmHg) increased at T18 (151 ± 34), T21 (152 ± 35), and T30 (140 ± 27), compared to T0 (111 ± 22). Sedation occurred at all times post-bolus, with a maximum peak at T12 (END 8 ± 6). The low dose of dexmedetomidine provided sedation in all animals, characterizing rapid metabolization and elimination. However, cardiovascular effects still may have negative repercussions in dogs with hemodynamic comorbidities, highlighting the caution and individualization of its use in certain patients.

Clinical evaluation of the sedative, antinociceptive and cardiorespiratory effects of intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with methadone in healthy dogs

In this prospective, randomised, blinded clinical study, we compared the sedative, antinociceptive and cardiorespiratory effects of intranasal (IN) dexmedetomidine at 5 μg/kg (diluted with 0.03 mL/kg NaCl 0.9%, DEX) with or without methadone (0.3 mg/kg; DEXMET), through a mucosal atomization device to one nostril in twenty healthy client-owned dogs. At 5-min intervals over 45 min, sedation score, onset, cardiopulmonary variables, mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNTs) were assessed, also ease of administration, adverse effects, and response to IV catheterization. Statistical analysis employed t-test, the Mann-Whitney U, repeated measures ANOVA and Chi-square tests as appropriate (P < 0.05). Higher sedation ocurred in DEXMET (7 [5-10]) compared to DEX (5 [2-7]) from 15 to 30 min (P < 0.01, median [interquartile range]). Heart rate was lower in DEXMET (P < 0.01; 65% reduction vs. 41% in DEX, P = 0.001). The MNTs were higher in DEXMET than DEX from 15 to 45 min (P < 0.01), peaking at T30 (17.1 ± 3.8, DEXMET and 8.5 ± 5.4 N, DEX). No differences were observed in mean arterial blood pressure and respiratory rate. Intranasal administration was considered easy for 8 dogs per group. Reverse sneezing (8 dogs; P < 0.001), sialorrhea and retching (4 and 2 dogs, respectively) occurred in DEXMET. Response to catheterisation was lower in DEXMET than DEX (P = 0.039; 2 and 7 dogs, respectively). In conclusion, intranasal methadone (0.3 mg/kg) increased the sedative and antinociceptive effects produced by dexmedetomidine (5 μg/kg) in healthy dogs and resulted in lower heart rate.

Multiple uses of dexmedetomidine in small animals: a mini review

Dexmedetomidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist, which use had an exponential increase in human and veterinary medicine in the last 10 years. The aim of this mini review is to summarize the various uses of dexmedetomidine underlining its new applications and capabilities in the small animals' clinical activity. While this drug was born as sedative in veterinary medicine, some studies demonstrated to be effective as an analgesic both in single administration and in continuous infusion. Recent studies have also shown the role of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant during locoregional anesthesia, increasing the duration of the sensitive block and consequently decreasing the demand for systemic analgesics. The various analgesic properties make dexmedetomidine an interesting drug for opioid-free analgesia. Some studies highlighted a potential neuroprotective, cardioprotective and vasculoprotective role of dexmedetomidine, thus conferring it a place in critical care medicine, such as trauma and septic patients. Dexmedetomidine has demonstrated to be a multitasking molecule and it is ready to face new challenges.

Intranasal dexmedetomidine with morphine or tramadol: A comparative study of effects on alfaxalone requirements for anesthesia in cats

Background and Aim

Intranasal (IN) sedatives provide a non-invasive route for premedication drug administration. This study compared the cardiorespiratory and sparing effects of IN dexmedetomidine combined with morphine (DM) or tramadol (DT) on alfaxalone requirements for anesthesia induction in cats.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-four cats were randomly assigned to three groups: Dexmedetomidine combined morphine (IN dexmedetomidine 20 μg/kg plus 0.2 mg/kg morphine), DT (IN dexmedetomidine 20 μg/kg plus 1 mg/kg tramadol), or control (no premedication). The intravenous dose of 1% alfaxalone for endotracheal intubation was recorded with sedation scores, cardiorespiratory parameters (heart rate and respiration rate), and side effects.

Results

Both DM and DT were associated with significantly higher sedation scores than baseline, and sedation scores were found to be highest 20 min after premedication. Sedation scores were comparable between DM and DT groups. Side effects, including hypersalivation, vomiting, and pupillary dilation, were observed in the DM and DT groups. The dosage of alfaxalone required in the DM group (1.5 ± 0.3 mg/kg) was comparable to that of the DT group (2.0 ± 0.6 mg/kg, p = 0.0861), and both groups required significantly less alfaxalone than the control group (3.0 ± 0.6 mg/kg; p < 0.01). Heart and respiratory rates were comparable between the DM and DT groups. Duration of anesthesia in the control group (11 ± 4 min) was significantly shorter than in the DM (29 ± 5 min, p = 0.0016) and DT (38 ± 14 min, p < 0.001) groups.

Conclusion

Intranasal administration of DM or DT produces good sedation and offers an alternative, non-invasive route for cats undergoing general anesthesia.

Comparing the effects of intravenous injection and intranasal atomisation of detomidine in sheep

BACKGROUND

Detomidine is an α-2 agonist sedative drug which reduces the release of norepinephrine in nerves. Administering this drug through intranasal (IN) route could cause direct transmission to the central nervous system. Therefore, IN administration of detomidine would decrease the side effects and the onset of sedation.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, IN administration of detomidine in sheep through an atomiser was compared to its IV administration.

METHODS

Fifteen mature female sheep with an approximate weight of 49.53 ± 1.72 kg were used. They were randomly divided into three groups: (1) atomising 10 μg/kg (IND₁₀ ); (2) IV 10 μg/kg (IVD) and (3) atomising 30 μg/kg (IND₃₀ ). Following administration, vital signs, electrocardiographic components, sedative score and biochemistry profile were measured after 15, 30 and 60 min, which were compared with the baseline measures.

RESULTS

Bradycardia and the percentage of reduction from the baseline value in the respiratory rate were lower in the IND₁₀ group compared to those in the IVD group. There was no significant difference in terms of the temperature and blood oxygen saturation (SpO₂ ) among all the groups (p > 0.05). The level of cortisol declined in all the groups, and in the IND₃₀ (60 min), it was significantly different with the baseline value. The level of glucose increased in all the groups compared to the baseline, which was not significant. Insulin concentration was reduced in all the groups, and in the IND₃₀ group, it changed significantly 60 min after the drug administration. Sedation onset time was faster in the IV group. However, sedation scores between the two administration methods were not different, and only a dose-dependent increase was found in the sedation score in the atomisation group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings revealed that IN atomisation of detomidine triggers similar sedation as its IV administration, which could be used as an alternative method.

Effects of intranasal and intramuscular dexmedetomidine in cats receiving total intravenous propofol anesthesia

Background and Aim:

The efficacy of intranasal (IN) dexmedetomidine in cats as a premedication remains elusive. Thus, this study aimed to compare the perioperative and sparing effects of IN and intramuscular (IM) dexmedetomidine administration on propofol requirements for anesthetic induction in cats.

Materials and Methods:

This study randomly assigned 16 cats into two groups of IN or IM dexmedetomidine at 20 μg/kg. Sedation scores and side effects were recorded at time points of 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 min after the dexmedetomidine administration. Anesthesia was induced with intravenous (IV) 1% propofol by titrating a bolus of 2 mg every 45 s and the total dose of the administered IV propofol to achieve endotracheal intubation was recorded.

Results:

Cats receiving IM dexmedetomidine were significantly associated with higher sedation scores. All cats were sedated at 20 min after premedication; however, the average composite sedation scores in the IN group were significantly lower than those in the IM group during premedication. Pre-operative side effects, including vomiting, were more frequently observed in the IN group (5 cats, 62.5%) than in the IM group (3 cats, 37.5%; p < 0.05). Higher body temperature (>1°F compared to baseline) was more frequently observed in the IN group (6 cats, 75.0%) than in the IM group (1 cat, 12.5%; p < 0.05). The dosage of required propofol in the IN group was significantly higher (1.1 ± 0.3 mg/kg) than that in the IM group (0.7 ± 0.2 mg/kg; p < 0.05). The duration of general anesthesia was comparable between the groups.

Conclusion:

IN dexmedetomidine produces moderate sedation and cats may have side effects, including vomiting and higher body temperature. Higher sparing effects of propofol were identified in the IM group compared with the IN group. Nonetheless, IN administration of dexmedetomidine provides a noninvasive alternative to the IM route.

Pharmacokinetics of intravenous, oral transmucosal, and intranasal buprenorphine in healthy male dogs

Effective management of pain in animals is of critical importance but options are limited for treating acute pain in dogs on an outpatient basis. The objective of this study was to compare the plasma concentrations and pharmacokinetics of a concentrated solution of buprenorphine, 1.8 mg/ml (Simbadol™) administered intravenously, intranasally, and via the oral transmucosal (OTM) route in healthy male dogs. Five healthy castrated adult male Beagle‐cross dogs were included in this randomized blocked crossover study. The dogs received 0.03 mg/kg body weight buprenorphine intravenously, intranasally, or via the OTM route, with a minimum 72‐h washout period between treatments. Blood samples were collected at multiple intervals up to 24 h post administration and buprenorphine plasma concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Non‐compartmental pharmacokinetic analysis revealed that the area under the curve of intravenous, intranasal, and OTM routes were 28.0 (15.1–41.3) h × ng/ml, 16.1 (3.4–28.7) h × ng/ml and 10.8 (8.8–11.8) h × ng/ml, respectively. The bioavailability of intranasal and OTM routes were 57.5 (22.7–93.7)% and 41.1 (25.5–69.4)%, respectively. Intranasal and OTM routes of administration of concentrated buprenorphine in dogs may allow for the provision of analgesic care at home.

Conventional and advanced echocardiographic assessment of systolic function in dogs sedated with dexmedetomidine or acepromazine

Dexmedetomidine and acepromazine, sedatives commonly used in dogs have opposite vascular effects, resulting in afterload increase and decrease, respectively. This could variably affect systolic myocardial function. Previous echocardiographic studies assessing the cardiovascular effects of these drugs used conventional echocardiography, while advanced techniques such as speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI), which are known to provide a more accurate assessment of systolic function, have been rarely used for this aim. Moreover, in the few studies using advanced techniques, the drugs where combined with opioids. Therefore, the main objective of this prospective study was to assess systolic myocardial function by conventional and advanced echocardiography (STE and TDI), in dogs sedated exclusively with dexmedetomidine or acepromazine not combined with other drugs. Twenty healthy dogs were randomly divided into two groups, Group A (acepromazine, 20 μg/kg IM), and Group D (dexmedetomidine, 5 μg/kg IM), cardiovascular parameters were assessed before sedation (T0), and thirty minutes afterwards (T1). Systolic arterial pressure and heart rate decreased in both groups at T1 as compared to T0. Only one conventional echocardiographic raw variable (left ventricular internal dimension in systole) and three out of five advanced echocardiographic variables (radial TDI systolic velocities at the epicardial region of the left ventricular free wall, longitudinal TDI systolic velocities of the septal mitral valve annulus and the STE-derived left ventricular global strain), were affected in Group D. A systolic impairment was observed in Group D and better estimated by advanced echocardiography. In Group A, only the end diastolic voume index (conventional echocardiography) was decreased. Both protocols seem to induce echocardiographic changes more likely secondary to their vascular action.