Palatability assessment of an oral recuperation fluid in healthy dogs during the perioperative period

Hypotonic enteral electrolyte solutions administered by nasoesophageal tube in continuous flow in dogs dehydrated by water restriction: Part 1

ABSTRACT The present study assessed and compared the effects of hypotonic enteral electrolyte solutions administered by nasoesophageal tube in continuous flow in dogs submitted to water restriction on packed cell volume; total serum protein and serum osmolarity concentrations; blood volume; plasma glucose and lactate levels; blood gas analysis, anion gap, and strong ion difference. Six adult dogs were used (four males and two females). All animals were submitted to both proposed treatments in a crossover design 6×2. The treatments were as follows: ESmalt consisting of 5g sodium chloride, 1g potassium chloride, 1g calcium acetate, 0.2g magnesium pidolate, and 9.6g maltodextrin that were diluted in 1.000mL water (measured osmotic concentration of 215mOsm L−1) and ESdext consisting of 5g sodium chloride, 1g potassium chloride, 1g calcium acetate, 0.2g magnesium pidolate, and 9.6g dextrose that were diluted in 1.000mL water (measured osmotic concentration of 243mOsm L−1). All solutions were administered at 15ml kg−1 h−1 for 4 hours. Both solutions increased the plasma volume in dehydrated dogs without causing adverse effects. However, ESmalt was more effective in promoting the increase in blood volume.

Palatability and Clinical Effects of an Oral Recuperation Fluid During the Recovery of Dogs With Suspected Parvoviral Enteritis

Dogs infected with canine parvovirus (CPV) can develop severe enteritis that requires supportive care until voluntary food and water consumption return. An oral recuperation fluid (ORF) may assist in the overall recovery from CPV. The hypotheses of the study were that dogs with naturally infected CPV would prefer the ORF to water and that dogs consuming the ORF would have a more rapid return to voluntary appetite and improved caloric intake during the initial recovery period compared with dogs consuming water. A total of 28 dogs with CPV were enrolled. Dogs were excluded if voluntary food or water intake was present at the time of study enrollment. Dogs were randomized to either an ORF or water group. The designated fluid was offered twice daily, followed by offering the opposite fluid 1 hour later if the designated fluid was refused. Dogs also received a standardized supportive treatment protocol. Beginning on day 2, all dogs were offered a gastrointestinal diet q8h, staggered with the fluid intake trials. A total of 40% (6/15) of dogs with CPV consumed the ORF as their designated fluid, and 31% (4/13) of dogs with CPV consumed water as their designated fluid (P = .71). For those dogs who refused their designated fluid, 56% (5/9) of the dogs consuming ORF ultimately consumed water, and 22% (2/9) of the dogs consuming water also consumed the ORF (P = .33). Dogs who consumed the ORF demonstrated a more rapid return to voluntary appetite (median = 1.5 days [range: 1-3]) compared with those that consumed water (median = 4.25 days [range: 1.5-5.5], P = .01) or neither fluid (median = 2 days [range: 1.5-5.5], P = .03). Additionally, those dogs consuming the ORF demonstrated greater caloric intake [median = 100% resting energy requirement (RER), range: 61%-100%] compared with those that consumed water (median = 19% RER; range: 9%-100%; P = .004) or neither fluid (median = 37% RER; range: 3-100; P = .05). This study suggests that some dogs with CPV voluntarily consume an ORF during the recovery phase of their illness and that consumption of the ORF may foster a more rapid return of voluntary appetite as well as improved caloric intake. Additional studies are warranted to further assess additional effects of this ORF during recovery from CPV.