Comparison of sedation scores and propofol induction doses in dogs after intramuscular premedication with butorphanol and either dexmedetomidine or medetomidine

Dose-dependent changes in orientation amplitude maps in the cat visual cortex after propofol bolus injections

A general intravenous anesthetic propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) is widely used in clinical, veterinary practice and animal experiments. It activates gamma- aminobutyric acid (GABAa) receptors. Though the cerebral cortex is one of the major targets of propofol action, no study of dose dependency of propofol action on cat visual cortex was performed yet. Also, no such investigation was done until now using intrinsic signal optical imaging. Here, we report for the first time on the dependency of optical signal in the visual cortex (area 17/area 18) on the propofol dose. Optical imaging of intrinsic responses to visual stimuli was performed in cats before and after propofol bolus injections at different doses on the background of continuous propofol infusion. Orientation amplitude maps were recorded. We found that amplitude of optical signal significantly decreased after a bolus dose of propofol. The effect was dose- and time-dependent producing stronger suppression of optical signal under the highest bolus propofol doses and short time interval after injection. In each hemisphere, amplitude at cardinal and oblique orientations decreased almost equally. However, surprisingly, amplitude at cardinal orientations in the ipsilateral hemisphere was depressed stronger than in contralateral cortex at most time intervals. As the magnitude of optical signal represents the strength of orientation tuned component, these our data give new insights on the mechanisms of generation of orientation selectivity. Our results also provide new data toward understanding brain dynamics under anesthesia and suggest a recommendation for conducting intrinsic signal optical imaging experiments on cortical functioning under propofol anesthesia.

Sedative effects and changes in cardiac rhythm with intravenous premedication of medetomidine, butorphanol and ketamine in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To determine the sedative effects and characteristics of cardiac rhythm with intravenous (IV) premedication of medetomidine, butorphanol and ketamine in dogs.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, blinded, randomized clinical trial.

ANIMALS

A total of 116 client-owned healthy dogs undergoing elective surgery.

METHODS

Dogs were randomly allocated one of four groups: group M, medetomidine 5 μg kg^-1; group B, butorphanol 0.2 mg kg^-1; group MB, medetomidine 5 μg kg^-1 and butorphanol 0.2 mg kg^-1; or group MBK, medetomidine 5 μg kg^-1, butorphanol 0.2 mg kg^-1 and ketamine 1 mg kg^-1 IV. Sedation was assessed using a numerical descriptive scale. Heart rate (HR) and rhythm were monitored; propofol dose (mg kg^-1 IV) to allow orotracheal intubation was documented. Data were analysed using anova, accounting for multiple testing with the Tukey honest significant difference test.

RESULTS

Sedation scores varied significantly between all groups at all time points, except between groups MB and MBK at four time points. HR decreased in all groups: most in groups M and MB, least in group B. HR was initially higher in group MBK than in groups M and MB. Arrhythmias occurred in all groups: group B showed second-degree atrioventricular blocks occasionally, all other groups showed additionally ventricular escape complexes and bundle branch blocks. Dose of propofol required for orotracheal intubation was significantly higher in group B (5.0 ± 2.0 mg kg^-1) than in group M (2.6 ± 0.6 mg kg^-1). Although no difference could be demonstrated between groups MB (1.4 ± 0.6 mg kg^-1) and MBK (0.9 ± 0.8 mg kg^-1), both groups required significantly less propofol than group M.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Medetomidine-based premedication protocols led to various bradyarrhythmias. Addition of subanaesthetic doses of ketamine to medetomidine-based protocols resulted in higher HRs, fewer bradyarrhythmias and fewer animals that required propofol for intubation without causing side effects in healthy dogs.

Comparison of the Transdermal and Intravenous Administration of Buprenorphine in the Management of Intra- and Postoperative Pain in Dogs Undergoing a Unilateral Mastectomy

The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness of transdermal patches of buprenorphine as an alternative route for the management of perioperative pain in dogs undergoing a unilateral mastectomy. Our hypothesis was that the transdermal route would allow the obtainment of an analgesic plan comparable to that of the injectable administration. Twelve dogs were divided in two groups. In the BupreP group (six dogs), buprenorphine patches were applied 40 h before the start of the surgery, guaranteeing a dosage of 5−6 μg/kg/h. In the BupreI group (six dogs), 20 μg/kg of buprenorphine was administered intravenously 30 min before the induction of anesthesia, and this was repeated every 6 h for 24 h. The main physiological parameters, sedation scores (0 = no sedation; 11 = deep sedation), and pain scores were monitored from 30 min before the surgery to 24 h after the end of anesthesia. All p values < 0.05 were defined as statistically significant. Thirty minutes before the surgery, the sedation scores were higher in BupreI (score = 10) compared to the BupreP group (score = 1). Moreover, during the mastectomy, the mean arterial pressure significantly increased in both groups even if nobody required additional analgesia. In the postoperative period, the pain scores did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups, maintaining values below the pain threshold at all times of the study. In conclusion, the transdermal administration of buprenorphine could guarantee an analgesic quality equal to that of the injectable route.

Intraocular pressure and cardiovascular effects of dexmedetomidine premedication and tiletamine-zolazepam for anesthetic induction in dogs

Background and Aim

The effect of anesthetic drugs on intraocular pressure (IOP) is an important concern in ophthalmic surgery. The impact of dexmedetomidine (DEX) combined with tiletamine-zolazepam on IOP is scarcely studied. This study aimed to evaluate IOP and cardiovascular effects in dogs after premedication with 5 μg/kg (DEX5) or 10 μg/kg (DEX10) of intramuscular DEX followed by intravenous tiletamine-zolazepam administration for induction of anesthesia in healthy dogs.

Materials and Methods

Eighteen dogs, American Society of Anesthesiologists I or II, without ocular abnormality were investigated. All dogs were randomly divided into the DEX5 (n = 9) and DEX10 groups (n = 9). The IOP, heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), oxygen saturation, and sedation scale were measured before premedication (baseline), after premedication at 5, 10, 15, and 20 min, after tiletamine-zolazepam administration, after endotracheal intubation, and post-operative.

Results

There were no significant differences between the groups at any time point. The DEX5 and DEX10 groups had significantly decreased HR values at 10 min compared with baseline. The IOP at 20 min was significantly lower compared to the baseline in the DEX10 group. Moreover, the DEX10 group showed increased IOP, HR, SBP, and sedation scale values after induction and intubation compared with 20 min, but these values did not differ significantly from baseline. All parameters of both groups did not change significantly between post-operative and baseline.

Conclusion

Intramuscular DEX (10 μg/kg) is an appropriate premedication in ophthalmic examination or surgical procedures. Moreover, it could be combined with tiletamine-zolazepam for generalized anesthesia in dogs with an ophthalmic problem, as it had no clinically significant effects on IOP or cardiovascular values.

Effects of vatinoxan in dogs premedicated with medetomidine and butorphanol followed by sevoflurane anaesthesia: a randomized clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate effects of vatinoxan in dogs, when administered as intravenous (IV) premedication with medetomidine and butorphanol before anaesthesia for surgical castration.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized, controlled, blinded, clinical trial.

ANIMALS

A total of 28 client-owned dogs.

METHODS

Dogs were premedicated with medetomidine (0.125 mg m^-2) and butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^-1) (group MB; n = 14), or medetomidine (0.25 mg m^-2), butorphanol (0.2 mg kg^-1) and vatinoxan (5 mg m^-2) (group MB-VATI; n = 14). Anaesthesia was induced 15 minutes later with propofol and maintained with sevoflurane in oxygen (targeting 1.3%). Before surgical incision, lidocaine (2 mg kg^-1) was injected intratesticularly. At the end of the procedure, meloxicam (0.2 mg kg^-1) was administered IV. The level of sedation, the qualities of induction, intubation and recovery, and Glasgow Composite Pain Scale short form (GCPS-SF) were assessed. Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (f_R), mean arterial pressure (MAP), end-tidal concentration of sevoflurane (Fe'Sevo) and carbon dioxide (Pe'CO₂) were recorded. Blood samples were collected at 10 and 30 minutes after premedication for plasma medetomidine and butorphanol concentrations.

RESULTS

At the beginning of surgery, HR was 61 ± 16 and 93 ± 23 beats minute^-1 (p = 0.001), and MAP was 78 ± 7 and 56 ± 7 mmHg (p = 0.001) in MB and MB-VATI groups, respectively. No differences were detected in f_R, Pe'CO₂, Fe'Sevo, the level of sedation, the qualities of induction, intubation and recovery, or in GCPS-SF. Plasma medetomidine concentrations were higher in group MB-VATI than in MB at 10 minutes (p = 0.002) and 30 minutes (p = 0.0001). Plasma butorphanol concentrations were not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In group MB, HR was significantly lower than in group MB-VATI. Hypotension detected in group MB-VATI during sevoflurane anaesthesia was clinically the most significant difference between groups.

Enantiospecific pharmacokinetics of intravenous dexmedetomidine in beagles

The goal of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic (PK) behaviour of dexmedetomidine in dogs administered as a pure enantiomer versus as part of a racemic mixture. Eight unmedicated intact purpose‐bread beagles were included. Two intravenous treatments of either medetomidine or dexmedetomidine were administered at 10‐ to 14‐day intervals. Atipamezole or saline solution was administered intramuscularly 45 min later. Venous blood samples were collected into EDTA collection tubes, and the quantification of dexmedetomidine and levomedetomidine was performed by chiral LC–MS/MS. All dogs appeared sedated after each treatment without complication. Plasma concentrations of levomedetomidine were measured only in the racemic group and were 51.4% (51.4%–56.1%) lower than dexmedetomidine. Non‐compartmental analysis (NCA) was performed for both drugs, while dexmedetomidine data were further described using a population pharmacokinetic approach. A standard two‐compartment mammillary model with linear elimination with combined additive and multiplicative error model for residual unexplained variability was established for dexmedetomidine. An exponential model was finally retained to describe inter‐individual variability on parameters of clearance (Cl₁) and central and peripheral volumes of distribution (V₁, V₂). No effect of occurrence, levomedetomidine or atipamezole could be observed on dexmedetomidine PK parameters. Dexmedetomidine did not undergo significantly different PK when administered alone or as part of the racemic mixture in otherwise unmedicated dogs.

Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine Premedication in Balanced Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Dogs

Simple Summary

Dexmedetomidine, on account of its potent sedative and analgesic properties, is commonly used in balanced anesthesia of small animal anesthesia; however, concerns regarding its cardiovascular effects prevent its full adoption into veterinary clinical practice. We conducted this meta-analysis to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine on sedation, analgesia, cardiovascular and adverse reactions in dogs compared to other premedications. The outcomes included sedation score, pain score, heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, mean arterial blood pressure and the incidence of adverse effects. Thirteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that dexmedetomidine provides a satisfactory sedative and analgesic effect in balanced anesthesia of dogs. After dexmedetomidine premedication, dogs experienced lower heart rate and higher blood pressure within an acceptable range. The combinations in balanced anesthesia and routes of delivering drugs would affect heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, and mean arterial blood pressure of dogs. Before using dexmedetomidine, an animal’s cardiovascular status should be fully considered.

Abstract

Dexmedetomidine is commonly used in small animal anesthesia for its potent sedative and analgesic properties; however, concerns regarding its cardiovascular effects prevent its full adoption into veterinary clinical practice. This meta-analysis was to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine on sedation, analgesia, cardiovascular and adverse reactions in dogs compared to other premedications. Following the study protocol based on the Cochrane Review Methods, thirteen studies were included in this meta-analysis ultimately, involving a total of 576 dogs. Dexmedetomidine administration probably improved in sedation and analgesia in comparison to acepromazine, ketamine and lidocaine (MD: 1.96, 95% CI: [−0.08, 4.00], p = 0.06; MD: −0.95, 95% CI: [−1.52, −0.37] p = 0.001; respectively). Hemodynamic outcomes showed that dogs probably experienced lower heart rate and higher systolic arterial blood pressure and mean arterial blood pressure with dexmedetomidine at 30 min after premedication (MD: −13.25, 95% CI: [−19.67, −6.81], p < 0.0001; MD: 7.78, 95% CI: [1.83, 13.74], p = 0.01; MD: 8.32, 95% CI: [3.95, 12.70], p = 0.0002; respectively). The incidence of adverse effects was comparable between dexmedetomidine and other premedications (RR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.58, 1.29], p = 0.47). In summary, dexmedetomidine provides satisfactory sedative and analgesic effects, and its safety is proved despite its significant hemodynamic effects as part of balanced anesthesia of dogs.

Pre-anaesthetic clinical examination influences anaesthetic protocol in dogs undergoing general anaesthesia and sedation

OBJECTIVES

Identify whether pre-anaesthetic clinical examination influences anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol in dogs presented for general anaesthesia and sedation at a large referral hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective clinical audit, 554 dogs, undergoing general anaesthesia or sedation for surgical, diagnostic or imaging procedures were included. Multiple attending anaesthetists completed a questionnaire divided into four sections (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol, pre-anaesthetic clinical examination findings and changes made to the anaesthetic protocol). The attending anaesthetist was able to review the patient's history before planning the anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol. The patients were examined and changes in American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification or anaesthetic protocol were recorded.

RESULTS

The initial anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol was altered in 23.3% (n=129/554) of cases following a pre-anaesthetic clinical examination, but American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status reclassification occurred in only 8.0% (n=37/464) of cases. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that pre-anaesthetic clinical examination performed by European College of Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia diplomates (odds ratio 5.8, 95% confidence interval 2.0 to 17.2), compared to anaesthesia interns, and the presence of an audible heart murmur (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 4.4) were factors linked to changes in anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol, whereas for each one kilogram increase in patient's weight, the odds of a change in anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol to occur decreased by 1.7% (odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.0).

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Pre-anaesthetic clinical examination has impact on American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, therefore estimation of patient's anaesthetic risk, and influences anaesthetic and analgesic agents and techniques protocol choice.

Effects of Medetomidine, Dexmedetomidine and their combination with Acepromazine on the intraocular pressure (IOP), tear secretion and pupil diameter in dogs

Background

A great number of sedatives and anaesthetics have been used to perform surgeries or routine ophthalmologic examinations in animals and sometimes the combination of these medicines has more suitable effects than each one alone.

Objectives

This paper aims to explore the main effects of Medetomidine + Acepromazine, Dexmedetomidine + Acepromazine on intraocular pressure, tear secretion and pupil diameter.

Methods

To accomplish the aforementioned aim, 32 adult dogs (aged one‐to‐three‐years‐old) were clinically examined. Dogs were divided into four groups consisting of group DA, Dexmedetomidine (5 µg/kg) + Acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg); Group D, Dexmedetomidine (5 µg/kg); Group M, Medetomidine (10 µg/kg); Group MA, Medetomidine (10 µg/kg) + Acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg). The ocular factors including tear production, pupil diameter and intraocular pressure of both right and left eyes were first measured and then recorded in each dog at time T₀ (−15 min). Afterwards, the drugs were administered intramuscularly, based on which the ocular factors were re‐measured at T₁ (+5 min), T₂ (+15 min) and T₃ (+20 min). All four groups showed a reduction in intraocular pressure, which was significant in DA, D and M groups.

Results

Furthermore, there was a fluctuation in the amount of tear secretion in DA and D groups (increase and then decrease), as well as a significant reduction in M and MA groups. Decreasing in pupil diameter also occurred in all four groups, but the reduction was significant only in DA and MA groups.

Conclusion

According to the results obtained, as the changes caused by the systemic administration of the above drug compounds did not exceed the physiological range, it can be concluded that these combinations could be utilized as suitable sedatives or pre‐anaesthetic compounds in the eye surgeries.

Effects of Sedation with Medetomidine and Dexmedetomidine on Doppler Measurements of Ovarian Artery Blood Flow in Bitches

The aim was to evaluate if medetomidine and dexmedetomidine affected arterial ovarian blood flow in dogs. The dogs were randomly assigned to two different groups. In Group 1, medetomidine (10 µg/kg) was administered intramuscularly and, in Group 2, dexmedetomidine (5 µg/kg) was used. After a preliminary exam, arterial blood pressure (BP) was measured and a duplex Doppler ultrasonographic examination of both ovarian arteries was performed. Twenty minutes after the administration of medetomidine or dexmedetomidine, BP and ovarian Doppler ultrasonography were repeated. High quality tracings of ovarian artery flow velocity were obtained in all dogs and Doppler parameters: Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV), End Diastolic Velocity (EDV) and Resistive Index (RI) were measured before and after drug administration in the left (LO) and right (RO) ovaries. PSV and EDV values decreased significantly after drug administration (p < 0.05) compared to the non-sedated values, but no differences were found between the LO and RO (p > 0.05). The RI was not affected by drugs administration in neither of the groups studied (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the administration of medetomidine or dexmedetomidine causes a decrease in blood flow velocity in the ovarian artery and may be a good choice to avoid excessive bleeding prior surgeries in which ovariectomy.

Efeitos cardiovasculares da medetomidina e cetamina em Puma concolor e tempo de recuperação após aplicação de ioimbina ou atipamezole

RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar as alterações cardiorrespiratórias causadas pela medetomidina associada à cetamina, e o tempo de recuperação após aplicação intramuscular de atipamezole ou ioimbina em Puma concolor. Para isso, foi realizada a aplicação de medetomidina (100µg/kg) associada à cetamina (5mg/kg) em 11 onças-pardas, sendo os parâmetros cardiorrespiratórios registrados a cada 15 minutos, durante 90 minutos de avaliação. Em seguida, a anestesia foi revertida com aplicação intramuscular de ioimbina (0,4mg/kg; n=5) ou atipamezole (0,25mg/kg; n=6), sendo analisado o tempo até a recuperação. Dos parâmetros cardiorrespiratórios avaliados, houve diferença apenas na frequência respiratória (entre os momentos 60 e 90 minutos), estando esta, todavia, dentro do intervalo de referência para a espécie. Além disso, verificou-se tempo para decúbito esternal significativamente menor nos animais do grupo atipamezole (18±7 minutos), quando comparado ao grupo ioimbina (36±17 minutos), entretanto o tempo de recuperação completa foi estatisticamente igual entre os dois reversores analisados. Assim, a associação anestésica promoveu anestesia eficiente, segura e de rápida indução em onças-pardas, permitindo a imobilização dos animais durante os 90 minutos de avaliação, sem a ocorrência de complicações. Ao se comparar a reversão anestésica com atipamezole e ioimbina, observou-se equivalência dos fármacos no tempo de recuperação completa dos animais.

Effect of Medetomidine, Dexmedetomidine, and Their Reversal with Atipamezole on the Nociceptive Withdrawal Reflex in Beagles

The objectives were: (1) to compare the antinociceptive activity of dexmedetomidine and medetomidine, and (2) to investigate its modulation by atipamezole. This prospective, randomized, blinded experimental trial was carried out on eight beagles. During the first session, dogs received either medetomidine (MED) (0.02 mg kg-1 intravenously (IV)] or dexmedetomidine (DEX) [0.01 mg kg-1 IV), followed by either atipamezole (ATI) (0.1 mg kg-1) or an equivalent volume of saline (SAL) administered intramuscularly 45 min later. The opposite treatments were administered in a second session 10-14 days later. The nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR) threshold was determined using a continuous tracking approach. Sedation was scored (0 to 21) every 10 min. Both drugs (MED and DEX) increased the NWR thresholds significantly up to 5.0 (3.7-5.9) and 4.4 (3.9-4.8) times the baseline (p = 0.547), at seven (3-11) and six (4-9) minutes (p = 0.938), respectively. Sedation scores were not different between MED and DEX during the first 45 min (15 (12-17), p = 0.67). Atipamezole antagonized sedation within 25 (15-25) minutes (p = 0.008) and antinociception within five (3-6) minutes (p = 0.008). Following atipamezole, additional analgesics may be needed to maintain pain relief.

Use of midazolam in combination with medetomidine for premedication in healthy dogs

OBJECTIVE

To assess the sedative effects, propofol sparing properties and impact on quality of induction and intubation of intravenous (IV) medetomidine and midazolam administered consecutively at different doses compared to medetomidine alone in healthy dogs for premedication.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, blinded, clinical study.

ANIMALS

A total of 40 adult healthy client owned dogs, weighing 18 ± 7 kg (mean ± standard deviation).

METHODS

Dogs were assigned to four groups: medetomidine 15 μg kg^-1 (positive control group), medetomidine 10 μg kg^-1 and midazolam 0.2 mg kg^-1, medetomidine 5 μg kg^-1 and midazolam 0.3 mg kg^-1, and medetomidine 5 μg kg^-1 and midazolam 0.2 μg kg^-1. The same clinician assessed sedation after administration at T2.5 minutes and T5 minutes using a composite simple descriptive sedation scale ranging between 0 and 15 (0 = no sedation; 15 = profound sedation). The dose of propofol for induction, quality of induction, ease of intubation and any adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in sedation scores between treatment groups at T2.5 minutes or T5 minutes (p = 0.82 and p = 0.63, respectively). Administration of midazolam in combination with medetomidine resulted in 71% of dogs displaying paradoxical behaviours (p < 0.0001) such as agitation, excitation, restlessness, aggression and vocalization, which was different from pre-sedation. Propofol requirement was not different between groups. Induction and tracheal intubation quality was smooth in all groups.

CONCLUSION

In healthy dogs, at the doses studied, the combination of medetomidine-midazolam administered IV for premedication provided moderate sedation but was associated with a high incidence of paradoxical behaviours. This drug combination IV is not recommended for premedication in healthy dogs.

Randomised clinical trial comparing clinically relevant sedation outcome measures in dogs after intramuscular administration of medetomidine in combination with midazolam or butorphanol for routine diagnostic imaging procedures

The aim of this study was to investigate the sedative effects of medetomidine in combination with midazolam or butorphanol for routine imaging procedures in dogs. Eighty client owned dogs were recruited in a prospective, randomised, blinded clinical study and randomly assigned to receive one of four treatments intramuscularly (IM): (1) 30μg/kg medetomidine (Med30); (2) 20μg/kg medetomidine combined with 0.3mg/kg butorphanol (Med20But0.3); (3) 20μg/kg medetomidine combined with 0.3mg/kg midazolam (Med20Mid0.3); and (4) 10μg/kg medetomidine combined with 0.3mg/kg midazolam (Med10Mid0.3). The level of sedation was evaluated using a composite sedation scale assessed by one investigator (0=no sedation, 15=profound sedation). The number of dogs deemed to be adequately clinically sedated and the dose of propofol administered as rescue sedation were recorded. Mean±standard deviation sedation scores at 30min after the commencement of treatment in the groups that received Med20But0.3 (9.8±4) and Med20Mid0.3 (8.9±4.4) were not statistically significantly different from each other, but were significantly different from the group receiving Med10Mid0.3 (5.6±3.6). Only Med20But0.3 was significantly associated with adequate clinical sedation, while Med10Mid0.3 was associated with 85% sedation failure. The rescue sedation dose of propofol (1.5±1mg/kg) for the Med10Mid0.3 group was significantly higher than for other treatments. A sedation score≥10 out of 15 was a satisfactory cut-off to predict adequate clinical sedation. In healthy dogs, the combination of medetomidine with midazolam did not provide comparable sedation to the same dose of medetomidine in combination with butorphanol in a clinical setting.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on the minimum infusion rate of propofol preventing movement in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of dexmedetomidine on induction dose and minimum infusion rate of propofol preventing movement (MIR_NM).

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized crossover, unmasked, experimental design.

ANIMALS

Three male and three female healthy Beagle dogs weighing 10.2 ± 2.8 kg.

METHODS

Dogs were studied on three occasions at weekly intervals. Premedications were 0.9% saline (treatment P) or dexmedetomidine (1 μg kg^-1, treatment PLD; 2 μg kg^-1, treatment PHD) intravenously. Anesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg kg^-1 and then 1 mg kg^-1 every 15 seconds) until intubation. Anesthesia was maintained for 90 minutes in P with propofol (0.5 mg kg^-1 minute^-1) and saline, in PLD with propofol (0.35 mg kg^-1 minute^-1) and dexmedetomidine (1 μg kg^-1 hour^-1), and in PHD with propofol (0.3 mg kg^-1 minute^-1) and dexmedetomidine (2 μg kg^-1 hour^-1). The stimulus (50 V, 50 Hz, 10 ms) was applied to the antebrachium, and propofol infusion was increased or decreased by 0.025 mg kg^-1 minute^-1 based on a positive or negative response, respectively. Data were analyzed using a mixed-model anova and presented as mean ± standard error.

RESULTS

Propofol induction doses were 8.68 ± 0.57 (P), 6.13 ± 0.67 (PLD) and 4.78 ± 0.39 (PHD) mg kg^-1 and differed among treatments (p < 0.05). Propofol MIR_NM values were 0.68 ± 0.13, 0.49 ± 0.16 and 0.26 ± 0.05 mg kg^-1 minute^-1 for P, PLD and PHD, respectively. Propofol MIR_NM decreased 59% in PHD (p < 0.05). Plasma propofol concentrations were 14.04 ± 2.30 (P), 11.30 ± 4.30 (PLD) and 7.96 ± 0.72 (PHD) μg mL^-1 and dexmedetomidine concentrations were 0.68 ± 0.12 (PLD) and 0.89 ± 0.08 (PHD) ng mL^-1 at MIR_NM determination.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dexmedetomidine (1 and 2 μg kg^-1) decreased propofol induction dose. Dexmedetomidine (2 μg kg^-1 hour^-1) resulted in a significant decrease in propofol MIR_NM.

Clinical comparison of dexmedetomidine and medetomidine for isoflurane balanced anaesthesia in horses

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of two balanced anaesthetic protocols (isoflurane-dexmedetomidine versus medetomidine) on sedation, cardiopulmonary function and recovery in horses.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, blinded, randomized clinical study.

ANIMALS

Sixty healthy adult warm blood horses undergoing elective surgery.

METHODS

Thirty horses each were sedated with dexmedetomidine 3.5 μg kg^-1 (group DEX) or medetomidine 7 μg kg^-1 (group MED) intravenously. After assessing and supplementing sedation if necessary, anaesthesia was induced with ketamine/diazepam and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen/air and dexmedetomidine 1.75 μg kg^-1 hour^-1 or medetomidine 3.5 μg kg^-1 hour^-1. Ringer's lactate (7-10 mL kg^-1 hour^-1) and dobutamine were administered to maintain normotension. Controlled mechanical ventilation maintained end-tidal expired carbon dioxide pressures at 40-50 mmHg (5.3-6.7 kPa). Heart rate, invasive arterial blood pressure, inspired and expired gas composition and arterial blood gases were measured. Dexmedetomidine 1 μg kg^-1 or medetomidine 2 μg kg^-1 was administered for timed and scored recovery phase. Data were analysed using two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance and chi-square test. Significance was considered when p≤0.05.

RESULTS

In group DEX, significantly more horses (n=18) did not fulfil the sedation criteria prior to induction and received one or more supplemental doses, whereas in group MED only two horses needed one additional bolus. Median (range) total sedation doses were dexmedetomidine 4 (4-9) μg kg^-1 or medetomidine 7 (7-9) μg kg^-1. During general anaesthesia, cardiopulmonary parameters did not differ significantly between groups. Recovery scores in group DEX were significantly better than in group MED.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Horses administered dexmedetomidine required more than 50% of the medetomidine dose to reach equivalent sedation. During isoflurane anaesthesia, cardiopulmonary function was comparable between the two groups. Recovery scores following dexmedetomidine were better compared to medetomidine.

Effect of fentanyl on the induction dose and minimum infusion rate of propofol preventing movement in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of fentanyl on the induction dose of propofol and minimum infusion rate required to prevent movement in response to noxious stimulation (MIR_NM) in dogs.

STUDY DESIGN

Crossover experimental design.

ANIMALS

Six healthy, adult intact male Beagle dogs, mean±standard deviation 12.6±0.4 kg.

METHODS

Dogs were administered 0.9% saline (treatment P), fentanyl (5 μg kg^-1) (treatment PLDF) or fentanyl (10 μg kg^-1) (treatment PHDF) intravenously over 5 minutes. Five minutes later, anesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg kg^-1, followed by 1 mg kg^-1 every 15 seconds to achieve intubation) and maintained for 90 minutes by constant rate infusions (CRIs) of propofol alone or with fentanyl: P, propofol (0.5 mg kg^-1 minute^-1); PLDF, propofol (0.35 mg kg^-1 minute^-1) and fentanyl (0.1 μg kg^-1 minute^-1); PHDF, propofol (0.3 mg kg^-1 minute^-1) and fentanyl (0.2 μg kg^-1 minute^-1). Propofol CRI was increased or decreased based on the response to stimulation (50 V, 50 Hz, 10 mA), with 20 minutes between adjustments. Data were analyzed using a mixed-model anova and presented as mean±standard error.

RESULTS

ropofol induction doses were 6.16±0.31, 3.67±0.21 and 3.33±0.42 mg kg^-1 for P, PLDF and PHDF, respectively. Doses for PLDF and PHDF were significantly decreased from P (p<0.05) but not different between treatments. Propofol MIR_NM was 0.60±0.04, 0.29±0.02 and 0.22±0.02 mg kg^-1 minute^-1 for P, PLDF and PHDF, respectively. MIR_NM in PLDF and PHDF was significantly decreased from P. MIR_NM in PLDF and PHDF were not different, but their respective percent decreases of 51±3 and 63±2% differed (p=0.035).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Fentanyl, at the doses studied, caused statistically significant and clinically important decreases in the propofol induction dose and MIR_NM.

Comparison of the effects of propofol and emulsified isoflurane alone or combined with dexmedetomidine on induction of anesthesia in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To compare the respective effects of propofol and emulsified isoflurane administered alone and in combination with dexmedetomidine on the quality of induction of anesthesia, physiological variables and recovery in dogs.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, experimental trial.

ANIMALS

Thirty-six adult mixed-breed dogs.

METHODS

Animals were randomly assigned to one of four induction protocols: propofol alone (group P); emulsified isoflurane alone (group EI); both propofol and dexmedetomidine (group PD), or both emulsified isoflurane and dexmedetomidine (group EID). Pulse rate (PR), respiratory rate (fR ), non-invasive arterial blood pressure and arterial blood gases were measured at baseline, before induction, immediately after intubation (time 0), and at 5 minute intervals until the dog began to swallow and the trachea was extubated. The quality of induction and recovery, and degree of ataxia were scored by a single investigator unaware of group assignment. The durations of anesthesia and recovery, and the incidence of adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

There were no clinically significant differences among the groups in induction quality. Systolic arterial pressure was lower in EID compared with P at 5 minutes. PR and fR were lower in PD and EID compared with P after induction. The PaCO2 at 5 minutes was higher than at baseline in group P. Ataxia score was lower in EID than in P. Time from induction to extubation and time from extubation to sternal recumbency were lower in EID compared with PD.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There were no clinically significant differences among the groups in induction quality. In PD and EID, but not in P, PR and fR were decreased after induction. The EID combination resulted in smooth and rapid induction and recovery and thus may be useful clinically for induction of anesthesia.