The effect of maropitant on intraoperative isoflurane requirements and postoperative nausea and vomiting in dogs: a randomized clinical trial

Ondansetron in dogs with nausea associated with vestibular disease: A double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled crossover study

Background

Nausea and emesis can be, among other signs, common manifestations of acute vestibular system dysfunction in dogs. Currently, antiemetic drugs, such as maropitant and metoclopramide, are used commonly, but do not appear to control nausea. A non‐placebo‐controlled preliminary study suggested good efficacy of 5‐HT3‐receptor antagonists, such as ondansetron, against nausea in dogs with vestibular syndrome.

Objectives

To assess and confirm the effect of ondansetron on behavior suggestive of nausea in dogs with vestibular syndrome.

Animals

Fourteen dogs with vestibular syndrome and clinical signs of nausea presented to a neurology service.

Methods

Placebo‐controlled, double‐blinded, crossover study. Behavioral assessment was performed hourly for 4 hours using an established numerical rating scale. The criteria salivation, lip licking, vocalization, restlessness, lethargy, and general nausea were scored. The occurrence of emesis was recorded. After scoring at T0 (pre‐dose) and T2 (2 hours post‐dose) either ondansetron (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo was injected IV. Two hours post‐dose, treatments were switched. Blood samples were collected to measure serum arginine vasopressin (AVP) concentration, which previously has been shown to correlate with clinical signs of nausea.

Results

Clinical resolution of nausea was observed 1 hour after administration of ondansetron, whereas serum AVP concentration decreased 4 hours after ondansetron administration.

Conclusion and Clinical Importance

Administration of ondansetron IV is beneficial for dogs with nausea secondary to acute vestibular syndrome. Ondansetron substantially and rapidly decreased clinical signs of nausea behavior and stopped emesis.

Clinical Assessment of Introducing Locoregional Anaesthesia Techniques as Part as the Intraoperative Analgesia Management for Canine Ovariohysterectomy in a Veterinary Teaching Hospital

This study compared four methods to provide intraoperative analgesia during canine ovariohysterectomy in a veterinary teaching hospital. A retrospective study was designed to assess the nociceptive response, cardiorespiratory stability, quality of recovery and complications of four analgesic protocols: epidural analgesia (EPIDURAL group), Quadratus Lumborum block (QLB group), Transversus Abdominis Plane block (TAP group), and just systemic analgesia (GENERAL group). Undergraduate students carried out all the loco-regional techniques under the direct supervision of a qualified anaesthetist. A total of 120 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study and were distributed as follows: 22, 27, 32 and 39 cases with EPIDURAL, GENERAL, QLB and TAP groups, respectively. Data were analysed with statistical software R using different statistical methods. Significant differences among groups were defined as p < 0.05. Based on our results, all the groups needed the same number of rescue analgesia during the intra-operative period. The use of loco-regional techniques anticipated a better quality of recovery compared with the general group. The EPIDURAL group showed a statistically lower expired fraction of sevoflurane. No differences were found regarding complications. In conclusion, these four analgesic methods are suitable and safe to be performed for canine ovariohysterectomy, although loco-regional techniques might have some advantages.

The use of ondansetron for the treatment of nausea in dogs with vestibular syndrome

Background

Vestibular syndrome is often accompanied by nausea. Drugs currently approved for its treatment have been developed to stop vomiting but not nausea. The efficacy of 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists to reduce nausea has been described for chemotherapy, but not for nausea secondary to vestibular disorders.

Methods

Sixteen dogs with vestibular syndrome-associated nausea were included in the open-label, multicentre study. The intensity of nausea-like behaviour was analysed before ondansetron administration (0.5 mg/kg i.v.) and 2 h afterwards, using a validated 5-point-scale. The occurrence and frequency of salivation, lip licking, restlessness, vocalisation, lethargy, and vomiting were assessed.

Results

All dogs initially showed signs of nausea, whereas only 31% showed vomitus. The intensity of nausea was significantly reduced in all dogs (p ≤ 0.0001) 2 h after ondansetron administration, including the clinical signs of nausea analysed in 11 dogs (salivation [p = 0.0078], lip licking [p = 0.0078], restlessness [p = 0.0039], and lethargy [p = 0.0078]) except for vocalisation (p > 0.9999).

Conclusions

The results provide preliminary evidence of the potential benefit of ondansetron in the treatment of nausea, which was present in all examined dogs. Vomiting was only observed in 5 dogs indicating that nausea can occur separately and should not be perceived only as a preceding stimulation of the vomiting centre.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12917-021-02931-9.

Prospective observational study of the use of omeprazole and maropitant citrate in veterinary specialist care

The proton pump inhibitor omeprazole is administered to dogs with gastroduodenal ulceration or oesophagitis, whereas the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist maropitant citrate is licensed as an antiemetic drug. In people, omeprazole is overprescribed in hospitals, increasing the risk of adverse effects and imposing unnecessary costs in healthcare. To investigate the use of omeprazole and maropitant in our veterinary specialist hospital, we conducted a prospective observational study in its Medicine and Surgery wards, recording patient data and obtaining contemporaneous information from clinicians about their reasons for administering either drug. In doing so, we find omeprazole and maropitant are administered to a large proportion of dogs, including to many of those with no presenting signs suggestive of gastrointestinal disease. We find prescribing clinicians consider both drugs safe but often underestimate their financial cost. We find the stated reasons and objective predictors of administration of both drugs vary according to clinical setting but that these modalities yield concordant results. Reviewing the manner of administration and stated indications for use of both drugs, we find omeprazole is often administered outside dosing recommendations, and both drugs are frequently administered for aims that are unlikely to be achieved when considering their known biological effects in dogs. In conclusion, our work reveals probable overprescribing of omeprazole and maropitant citrate in hospitalised dogs, highlighting a need for initiatives to decrease inappropriate prescribing.

Evaluating the anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties of maropitant: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The neurotransmitter Substance P, and its neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) are involved in the regulation of many pathophysiological processes including emesis, inflammation and nociceptive processing. This review provides a brief summary of the anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties of experimental NK-1R antagonists followed by a systematic review and meta-analysis on maropitant, the only NK-1R antagonist with a label indication for emesis in veterinary patients. There is very limited evidence based information on the putative clinical utilisation of maropitant for pain and inflammation. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate published reports on anti-inflammatory, analgesic and anaesthesia-sparing effects of maropitant. Medline, Pubmed, Science direct and Web of Science were searched to identify all published studies on maropitant, followed by a meta-analysis. Fourteen studies with 128 animals receiving maropitant and 127 controls met the inclusion criteria. Overall, maropitant had a significant inhalation anaesthetic-sparing effect (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -1.30, -0.54; P < 0.00001). However, treatment with maropitant had no effect on pain (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.37, 0.48; P = 0.80), or leukocyte cell infiltration in different inflammatory conditions (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.31, 0.11; P = 0.10). Based on all eligible studies for this review, it can be deduced that maropitant significantly reduced the minimum alveolar concentrations for isoflurane and sevoflurane for many different surgical procedures but it had no clearly proven effect on inflammation and pain.

The effect of intravenous maropitant on blood pressure in healthy awake and anesthetized dogs

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of intravenous maropitant on arterial blood pressure in healthy dogs while awake and under general anesthesia.

DESIGN

Experimental crossover study.

ANIMALS

Eight healthy adult Beagle dogs.

PROCEDURE

All dogs received maropitant (1 mg kg-1) intravenously under the following conditions: 1) awake with non-invasive blood pressure monitoring (AwNIBP), 2) awake with invasive blood pressure monitoring (AwIBP), 3) premedication with acepromazine (0.005 mg kg-1) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg-1) intramuscularly followed by propofol induction and isoflurane anesthesia (GaAB), and 4) premedication with dexmedetomidine (0.005 mg kg-1) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg-1) intramuscularly followed by propofol induction and isoflurane anesthesia (GaDB). Heart rate (HR), systolic (SAP), diastolic (DAP), and mean blood pressures (MAP) were recorded before injection of maropitant (baseline), during the first 60 seconds of injection, during the second 60 seconds of injection, at the completion of injection and every 2 minutes post injection for 18 minutes. The data were compared over time using a Generalized Linear Model with mixed effects and then with simple effect comparison with Bonferroni adjustments (p <0.05).

RESULTS

There were significant decreases from baseline in SAP in the GaAB group (p < 0.01) and in MAP and DAP in the AwIBP and GaAB (p < 0.001) groups during injection. A significant decrease in SAP (p < 0.05), DAP (p < 0.05), and MAP (p < 0.05) occurred at 16 minutes post injection in GaDB group. There was also a significant increase in HR in the AwIBP group (p < 0.01) during injection. Clinically significant hypotension occurred in the GaAB group with a mean MAP at 54 ± 6 mmHg during injection.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous maropitant administration significantly decreases arterial blood pressure during inhalant anesthesia. Patients premedicated with acepromazine prior to isoflurane anesthesia may develop clinically significant hypotension.

Pharmacokinetics of maropitant citrate after oral administration of multiple doses in adult horses

The neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonist, maropitant citrate, mitigates nausea and vomiting in dogs and cats. Nausea is poorly understood in horses, and clinical use of NK-1 receptor antagonists has not been reported. This study aimed to determine the pharmacokinetics and safety of maropitant after administration of multiple doses. We hypothesized that maropitant concentrations would be similar at steady state to those reported in dogs, with minimal adverse effects. Maropitant was administered at 4 mg/kg orally, once daily for 5 days in seven adult horses. Serial plasma maropitant concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were determined. The maximum, minimum, and average concentrations of maropitant achieved at steady state were 375.5 ± 200, 16.8 ± 7.7, and 73.5 ± 45.1 ng/ml, respectively. The terminal elimination half-life was 11.6 ± 1.4 hr, and the accumulation index was 1.3 ± 0.07. Heart rate decreased between Day 1 and Day 5 (p = .005), with three horses having heart rates of 20 beats per minute and atrioventricular block on Day 5. Pharmacokinetics of repeated maropitant administration suggests the drug could be considered for use in healthy horses. Further investigation on the clinical relevancy of its cardiac effects is warranted.

Effect of midazolam on the quality and duration of anaesthetic recovery in healthy dogs undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy or castration

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of a single dose of midazolam affects quality and duration of the recovery period in healthy dogs undergoing elective castration or ovariohysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, masked clinical trial.

ANIMAL POPULATION

Seventy-four client-owned dogs undergoing neutering.

METHODS

Following cage demeanour scoring using a simple descriptive scale (SDS), dogs were premedicated with acepromazine (0.03 mg kg^-1) and pethidine (3 mg kg^-1) intramuscularly (quadriceps muscle). Twenty minutes later sedation was scored with an SDS. Male dogs were induced with midazolam (0.25 mg kg^-1) (group M) or an equivalent amount of Hartmann's solution (group P) and propofol intravenously (IV). Female dogs were induced with propofol alone and were administered midazolam (group M) or Hartmann's solution (group P) 5 minutes before intraoperative manipulation of the first ovary. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. Intraoperative analgesia was provided with morphine (0.3 mg kg^-1 IV) prior to the start of surgery. Male dogs were administered intratesticular lidocaine (1 mg kg^-1). All dogs were administered meloxicam (0.2 mg kg^-1 IV) at the end of the procedure, and recovery was scored with an SDS following extubation and 30 minutes later. Time to extubation, head lift, sternal position and standing and complications during recovery were recorded. Data are presented as median (range).

RESULTS

Time to standing was significantly longer in animals in group M [56 (13-179) minutes] than in group P [44 (4-137) minutes], and the early recovery score in group M [3 (2-6)] was overall worse than in group P [3 (1-5)]. Significantly more dogs in group M (n = 30) than in group P (n = 22) displayed hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The administration of midazolam prolonged time to standing and had a mild negative effect on the quality of recovery in a pooled population of healthy male and female dogs undergoing neutering.

Evaluation of the Antinociceptive Effect of Maropitant, a Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonist, in Cats Undergoing Ovariohysterectomy

Maropitant is a neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist that can be used for pain management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of continuous infusion of two doses of maropitant on cardiorespiratory parameters and its postoperative analgesic effect in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Thirty cats were randomly assigned to one of three groups (10 cats each group): the control group (CG) received a continuous infusion of 10 ml/kg/h Ringer's lactate; GM30 and GM100 first received an intravenous (IV) bolus of 1 mg/kg maropitant; GM30 then received continuous infusion of 30 μg/kg/h maropitant; and GM100 then received continuous infusion of 100 μg/kg/h maropitant. The maropitant was diluted into Ringer's lactate and the GM30 and GM100 also received fluids intraoperatively. In all groups, premedication included intramuscular injections of morphine and acepromazine, followed by induction with propofol and maintenance with isoflurane. Temperature, heart rate (HR), Doppler blood pressure (DBP), respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and measuring the end-tidal carbon dioxide and isoflurane were monitored. Postoperative pain was evaluated using a visual analog scale and the UNESP-Botucatu multidimensional composite pain scale in cats; morphine was used for analgesic rescue. During the surgical procedure, cats in GM100 demonstrated lower HR and DBP than those in CG. With regard to the evaluation of postoperative pain, GM100 required the least frequent morphine rescue and less rescue analgesia compared with CG. In conclusion, cats in GM100 maintained lower DBP and HR and required lower analgesic rescue during the postoperative period. The results suggested that animals receiving maropitant bolus (1 mg/kg) plus (100 μg/kg/h) experienced greater postoperative comfort, reflected by the lesser need for analgesic rescue. The use of maropitant in surgical procedures in cats contributes to postoperative comfort.

State of the art analgesia-Recent developments pharmacological approaches to acute pain management in dogs and cats: Part 2

There has been considerable interest in the area of acute pain management over recent years, focusing on pain assessment, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The evidence base for our clinical decision making and treatment of patients is ever increasing and becoming more robust. There is still a tendency to base some aspects of pain management on poor quality evidence and this requires further input in years to come. With new literature come new ideas and this review will detail the current knowledge base behind pharmacological management of acute pain in dogs and cats. The known mechanisms of action of each analgesic and its evidence will be considered. The second part of this review will consider the non-traditional analgesics, describing their component drugs individually, thereby focusing on their mechanisms of action and the current evidence for their use in acute pain management.