Search

Objective: To compare the analgesic effects of buprenorphine, carprofen, and their combination in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy., Study Design: Prospective, randomized blinded clinical study., Animals: 60 dogs., Methods: Treatments were buprenorphine 0.02 mg kg(-1), intramuscularly (IM) (group B); carprofen 4 mg kg(-1), subcutaneously (SC) (group C); or a combination of both (group CB). Anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. A Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, 0-100 mm) and the Glasgow Composite Pain Scale (GCMPS, 0-24) were used to evaluate comfort and sedation at baseline, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours after extubation. Rescue analgesia was provided with buprenorphine (0.02 mg kg(-1)). Wound swelling measurements (WM) and a visual inflammation score (VIS) of the incision were made after surgery and 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours later. p < 0.05 was considered significant., Results: Group C required more propofol (5.0 +/- 1.4 mg kg(-1)) compared with B (3.3 +/- 1.1 mg kg(-1)) and CB (3.2 +/- 0.7 mg kg(-1)); respectively, p = 0.0002 and 0.0001. Rescue analgesia was required in nine dogs. B had a higher GCMPS and DIVAS III score at 6 hours (2.6 +/- 2.5) and (23 +/- 22.5 mm) compared with C (1.0 +/- 1.3, 6 +/- 7.3 mm) and CB (1.5 +/- 1.4, 8 +/- 10.7 mm); respectively, p = 0.02 and 0.006. Group C had a lower sedation score at 2 hours (43 +/- 23.6 mm) compared with B (68 +/- 32.1 mm) and BC (69 +/- 22.1 mm); respectively, p = 0.03 and 0.004. Group B had a higher WM score at 2 hours (3 +/- 0.8 mm) compared with C (2 +/- 0.6 mm) p = 0.01 and at 6 hours (3 +/- 1 mm) compared with C (2 +/- 0.8 mm) and CB (2 +/- 0.8 mm); respectively, p = 0.01 and 0.008. VIS was not different between groups., Conclusion and Clinical Relevance: All treatments provided satisfactory analgesia for the first 6 hours and at 24 hours. C and CB pain score and WS were superior to B at 6 hours. No superior analgesic effect was noted when the drugs were combined.

Objective: To determine the influence of a low-dose constant rate infusion (LCRI; 50 microg kg(-1) minute(-1)) and high-dose CRI (HCRI; 200 microg kg(-1) minute(-1)) lidocaine infusion on the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of isoflurane (I) in dogs., Study Design: Prospective experimental study., Animals: Ten mongrel dogs (four females, six males), weighing 20-26.3 kg., Methods: Dogs were anesthetized with I in oxygen and their lungs mechanically ventilated. Baseline MAC was determined using mechanical or electrical stimuli. Lidocaine (2 mg kg(-1) IV) was administered over 3 minutes, followed by the LCRI and MAC determination commenced 30 minutes later. Once MAC was determined following LCRI, the lidocaine infusion was stopped for 30 minutes. A second bolus of lidocaine (2 mg kg(-1), IV) was administered, followed by the HCRI and MAC re-determined. Concentrations of lidocaine and its metabolites were measured at end-tidal I concentrations immediately above and below MAC. Heart rates and blood pressures were measured., Results: Minimum alveolar concentration of I was 1.34 +/- 0.11 (%; mean +/- SD) for both types of stimulus. The LCRI significantly reduced MAC to 1.09 +/- 0.13 (18.7% reduction) and HCRI to 0.76 +/- 0.10 (43.3% reduction). Plasma concentrations (ng mL(-1), median; value below and above MAC, respectively) for LCRI were: lidocaine, 1465 and 1537; glycinexylidide (GX), 111 and 181; monoethylglycinexylidide (MEGX), 180 and 471 and for HCRI were: lidocaine, 4350 and 4691; GX, 784 and 862; MEGX, 714 and 710. Blood pressure was significantly increased at 30 minutes after high dose infusion., Conclusion and Clinical Relevance: Lidocaine infusions reduced the MAC of I in a dose-dependent manner and did not induce clinically significant changes on heart rate or blood pressure.

Objective: To compare 3 types of noxious stimuli applied to various anatomic areas of anesthetized dogs and rabbits for determination of the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC)., Animals: 10 dogs and 10 rabbits., Procedure: Dogs were anesthetized with isoflurane and halothane in a randomized order. Rabbits were anesthetized with isoflurane. The MAC was determined by skin incision on the lateral aspect of the chest; clamping of the tail, paw of the forelimb, and paw of the hind limb; and application of electrical current to the oral mucosa (dogs only), forelimb, and hind limb. The MAC was the end-tidal concentration midway between the value permitting and preventing purposeful movement in response to noxious stimuli., Results: In dogs, mean +/- SEM MAC for isoflurane was 1.27 +/- 0.05% for clamping stimuli, 1.36 +/- 0.04% for oral electrical stimulation, 1.35 +/- 0.04% for electrical stimulation to the limbs, and 1.01 +/- 0.07% for surgical incision. The MAC for halothane was 0.97 +/- 0.03% for tail clamping, 0.96 +/- 0.03% for clamping of the limbs, 1.04 +/- 0.03% for electrical stimulation, and 0.75 +/- 0.06% for surgical incision. In rabbits, MAC for isoflurane was 2.08 +/- 0.02% for clamping stimuli, 2.04 +/- 0.02% for electrical stimulation, and 0.90 +/- 0.02% for surgical incision. The MAC for surgical incision was significantly lower than values for the other methods in both species., Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Use of electrical current and clamping techniques resulted in similar MAC values. Surgical incision underestimated MAC values in dogs and rabbits.