首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
ObjectiveTo compare the effects of propofol and alfaxalone on respiration in cats.Study designRandomized, ‘blinded’, prospective clinical trial.AnimalsTwenty cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy.MethodsAfter premedication with medetomidine 0.01 mg kg−1 intramuscularly and meloxicam 0.3 mg kg−1 subcutaneously, the cats were assigned randomly into two groups: group A (n = 10) were administered alfaxalone 5 mg kg−1 minute−1 followed by 10 mg kg−1 hour−1 intravenously (IV) and group P (n = 10) were administered propofol 6 mg kg−1 minute−1 followed by 12 mg kg−1hour−1 IV for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia, respectively. After endotracheal intubation, the tube was connected to a non-rebreathing system delivering 100% oxygen. The anaesthetic maintenance drug rate was adjusted (± 0.5 mg kg−1 hour−1) every 5 minutes according to a scoring sheet based on physiologic variables and clinical signs. If apnoea > 30 seconds, end-tidal carbon dioxide (Pe′CO2) > 7.3 kPa (55 mmHg) or arterial haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2) < 90% occurred, manual ventilation was provided. Methadone was administered postoperatively. Data were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests, Fisher's exact test, linear mixed-effects models and binomial test.ResultsManual ventilation was required in two and eight of the cats in group A and P, respectively (p = 0.02). Two cats in both groups showed apnoea. Pe′CO2 > 7.3 kPa was recorded in zero versus four and SpO2 < 90% in zero versus six cats in groups A and P respectively. Induction and maintenance dose rates (mean ± SD) were 11.6 ± 0.3 mg kg−1 and 10.7 ± 0.8 mg kg−1 hour−1 for alfaxalone and 11.7 ± 2.7 mg kg−1 and 12.4 ± 0.5 mg kg−1 hour−1 for propofol.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAlfaxalone had less adverse influence on respiration than propofol in cats premedicated with medetomidine. Alfaxalone might be better than propofol for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia when artificial ventilation cannot be provided.  相似文献   

2.
ObjectiveTo determine the effects of propofol or thiopental induction on intraocular pressures (IOP) in normal dogs.Study designProspective randomized experimental study.AnimalsTwenty-two random-source dogs weighing 19.5 ± 5.3 kg.MethodsDogs were randomly assigned to receive propofol 8 mg kg−1 IV (group P) or thiopental 18 mg kg−1 IV (group T) until loss of jaw tone. Direct arterial blood pressure, arterial blood gasses, and IOP were measured at baseline, after pre-oxygenation but before induction, before endotracheal intubation, and after intubation.ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups with regard to weight, body condition score, breed group, or baseline or before-induction IOP, arterial blood pressure, or blood gases. The baseline IOP was 12.9 mmHg. Before endotracheal intubation, IOP was significantly higher compared to baseline and before induction in dogs receiving propofol. After intubation with propofol, IOP was significantly higher compared to thiopental and was significantly higher compared to before induction. After intubation, IOP was significantly lower compared to before intubation in dogs receiving thiopental. Propofol increased IOP before intubation by 26% over the before-induction score and thiopental increased IOP by 6% at the same interval. The IOP in group P remained 24% over the before induction score whereas thiopental ultimately decreased IOP 9% below baseline after intubation. There was no significant relationship between any cardiovascular or blood gas parameter and IOP at any time. There was no significant relationship between the changes in any cardiovascular or blood gas parameter and the changes in IOP between time points.Conclusions and clinical relevancePropofol caused a significant increase in IOP compared to baseline and thiopental. Thiopental caused an insignificant increase in IOP which decreased after intubation. Propofol should be avoided when possible in induction of anesthesia in animals where a moderate increase in IOP could be harmful.  相似文献   

3.
  相似文献   

4.
ObjectiveTo evaluate effects of repeated alfaxalone or propofol administration on haematological and serum biochemical variables in cats undergoing radiotherapy.Study designProspective, block-randomized, clinical trial.AnimalsA group of 39 client-owned cats.MethodsAfter butorphanol (0.2 mg kg–1) and midazolam (0.1 mg kg–1) sedation, cats were randomly assigned to receive either alfaxalone or propofol for induction of anaesthesia and sevoflurane maintenance. Cats were anaesthetized daily with the same induction agent for 10–12 days. Complete blood counts, reticulocytes, Heinz body score and serum biochemistry were performed before the first treatment (T1), at T6, T10 and 3 weeks after the final treatment (T21). Cumulative induction agent dose for each cat at each time point was evaluated for an effect on Heinz body score. Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation; p < 0.05.ResultsAt baseline there were no significant differences in signalment or blood variables between groups. A significant decrease in haematocrit of 2.3% ± 0.77 (p = 0.02) between T1-T6 and T1-T10 [mean 4.1% (± 0.78, p < 0.0001)] was detected, with a significant increase in haematocrit of 2.1% ± 0.80 (p = 0.046) between T6-T21 and 4.0% ± 0.8 (p < 0.001) between T10-T21. Heinz body score significantly increased by 1.86 ± 0.616 (p = 0.013) between T1-T10. In the propofol group, reticulocytes increased significantly between T1-T6 [mean 23,090 μL–1 ± 7670 (p = 0.02)] and T1-T10 [mean 27,440 μL–1 ± 7990 (p = 0.007)]. Mean cumulative dose at T10 was 19.65 mg kg–1 ± 5.3 and 43.4 mg kg–1 ± 14.4 for alfaxalone and propofol, respectively, with no significant effect on Heinz body formation at any time point.Conclusions and Clinical relevanceHaematocrit decreased in both groups with recovery after 3 weeks. Repeated alfaxalone and propofol administration was not associated with marked haematological or serum biochemistry changes.  相似文献   

5.
ObjectiveTo compare the physiological parameters, arterial blood gas values, induction quality, and recovery quality after IV injection of alfaxalone or propofol in dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, blinded crossover.AnimalsEight random-source adult female mixed-breed dogs weighing 18.7 ± 4.5 kg.MethodsDogs were assigned to receive up to 8 mg kg?1 propofol or 4 mg kg?1 alfaxalone, administered to effect, at 10% of the calculated dose every 10 seconds. They then received the alternate drug after a 6-day washout. Temperature, pulse rate, respiratory rate, direct blood pressure, and arterial blood gases were measured before induction, immediately post-induction, and at 5-minute intervals until extubation. Quality of induction, recovery, and ataxia were scored by a single blinded investigator. Duration of anesthesia and recovery, and adverse events were recorded.ResultsThe mean doses required for induction were 2.6 ± 0.4 mg kg?1 alfaxalone and 5.2 ± 0.8 mg kg?1 propofol. After alfaxalone, temperature, respiration, and pH were significantly lower, and PaCO2 significantly higher post-induction compared to baseline (p < 0.03). After propofol, pH, PaO2, and SaO2 were significantly lower, and PaCO2, HCO3, and PA-aO2 gradient significantly higher post-induction compared to baseline (p < 0.03). Post-induction and 5-minute physiologic and blood gas values were not significantly different between alfaxalone and propofol. Alfaxalone resulted in significantly longer times to achieve sternal recumbency (p = 0.0003) and standing (p = 0.0004) compared to propofol. Subjective scores for induction, recovery, and ataxia were not significantly different between treatments; however, dogs undergoing alfaxalone anesthesia were more likely to have ≥1 adverse event (p = 0.041). There were no serious adverse events in either treatment.Conclusions and clinical relevanceThere were no clinically significant differences in cardiopulmonary effects between propofol and alfaxalone. A single bolus of propofol resulted in shorter recovery times and fewer adverse events than a single bolus of alfaxalone.  相似文献   

6.
ObjectiveTo determine the effects of graded doses of propofol on cardiovascular parameters and intraocular pressures (IOP) in normal dogs.Study designProspective, randomized, modified Latin square, cross-over experimental study.AnimalsEleven adult random-source dogs weighing 20.2 ± 5.7 kg.MethodsThere were three treatment groups: propofol 8 mg kg?1 intravenous (IV) until loss of jaw tone (Group P), propofol until loss of jaw tone +20% (Group P20), and propofol until loss of jaw tone +50% (Group P50). Atracurium 0.1 mg kg?1 IV was administered in all treatments immediately after the propofol. All dogs received the three treatments in a randomized order, with at least a one week interval between treatments. Direct arterial blood pressure and IOP by applanation tonometry were obtained at baseline, after 5 minutes of pre-oxygenation (before induction), before, and after intubation. Blood gas samples were obtained at baseline, after pre-oxygenation, and before intubation.ResultsThere was no significant difference in IOP readings at any time point among groups. The IOP was significantly higher before intubation versus before induction in all three groups. There was a significantly smaller change in systolic, mean (MAP), and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressures in the P50 group compared with the P group after intubation. There was a significantly smaller change in MAP and DAP in the P50 group compared with the P20 group after intubation. The increase in CO2 from before induction to before intubation was significantly greater in the P50 group than in the P or P20 groups.Conclusions and clinical relevanceGraded doses of propofol did not affect the increase in IOP observed with propofol induction in normal dogs. Higher doses of propofol are of no apparent additional benefit in animals who cannot tolerate an abrupt increase in IOP but may be of benefit in dogs who cannot tolerate an abrupt increase in blood pressure accompanying orotracheal intubation.  相似文献   

7.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the heart rate (HR) and systemic arterial pressure (sAP) effects, and propofol induction dose requirements in healthy dogs administered propofol with or without guaifenesin for the induction of anesthesia.Study designProspective blinded crossover experimental study.AnimalsA total of 10 healthy adult female Beagle dogs.MethodsDogs were premedicated with intravenous (IV) butorphanol (0.4 mg kg–1) and administered guaifenesin 5% at 50 mg kg–1 (treatment G50), 100 mg kg–1 (treatment G100) or saline (treatment saline) IV prior to anesthetic induction with propofol. HR, invasive sAP and respiratory rate (fR) were recorded after butorphanol administration, after guaifenesin administration and after propofol and endotracheal intubation. Propofol doses for intubation were recorded. Repeated measures analysis of variance (anova) was used to determine differences in propofol dose requirements among treatments, and differences in cardiopulmonary values over time and among treatments with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsPropofol doses (mean ± standard deviation) for treatments saline, G50 and G100 were 3.3 ± 1.0, 2.7 ± 0.7 and 2.1 ± 0.8 mg kg–1, respectively. Propofol administered was significantly lower in treatment G100 than in treatment saline (p = 0.04). In treatments G50 and G100, HR increased following induction of anesthesia and intubation compared with baseline measurements. HR was higher in treatment G100 than in treatments G50 and saline following induction of anesthesia. In all treatments, sAP decreased following intubation compared with baseline values. There were no significant differences in sAP among treatments. fR was lower following intubation than baseline and post co-induction values and did not differ significantly among treatments.Conclusions and clinical relevanceWhen administered as a co-induction agent in dogs, guaifenesin reduced propofol requirements for tracheal intubation. HR increased and sAP and fR decreased, but mean values remained clinically acceptable.  相似文献   

8.
ObjectiveTo compare the effect of alfaxalone and propofol on heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) after fentanyl administration in healthy dogs.Study designProspective, randomised clinical study.AnimalsFifty healthy client owned dogs (ASA I/II) requiring general anaesthesia for elective magnetic resonance imaging for neurological conditions.MethodsAll dogs received fentanyl 7 μg kg−1 IV and were allocated randomly to receive either alfaxalone (n = 25) or propofol (n = 25) to effect until endotracheal (ET) intubation was possible. Heart rate and oscillometric BP were measured before fentanyl (baseline), after fentanyl (Time F) and after ET intubation (Time GA). Post-induction apnoea were recorded. Data were analysed using Fisher’s exact test, Mann Whitney U test and one-way anova for repeated measures as appropriate; p value <0.05 was considered significant.ResultsDogs receiving propofol showed a greater decrease in HR (-14 beat minute−1, range -47 to 10) compared to alfaxalone (1 beat minute−1, range -33 to 26) (p = 0.0116). Blood pressure decreased over the three time periods with no difference between groups. Incidence of post-induction apnoea was not different between groups.ConclusionFollowing fentanyl administration, anaesthetic induction with propofol resulted in a greater negative chronotropic effect while alfaxalone preserved or increased HR.Clinical relevanceFollowing fentanyl administration, HR decreases more frequently when propofol rather than alfaxalone is used as induction agent. However, given the high individual variability and the small change in predicted HR (-7.7 beats per minute after propofol), the clinical impact arising from choosing propofol or alfaxalone is likely to be small in healthy animals. Further studies in dogs with myocardial disease and altered haemodynamics are warranted.  相似文献   

9.
ObjectiveHypoxemia is common during equine field anesthesia. Our hypothesis was that oxygen therapy from a portable oxygen concentrator would increase PaO2 during field anesthesia compared with the breathing of ambient air.Study designProspective clinical study.AnimalsFifteen yearling (250 – 400 kg) horses during field castration.MethodsHorses were maintained in dorsal recumbency during anesthesia with an intravenous infusion of 2000 mg ketamine and 500 mg xylazine in 1 L of 5% guaifenesin. Arterial samples for blood gas analysis were collected immediately post-induction (PI), and at 15 and 30 minutes PI. The control group (n = 6) breathed ambient air. The treatment group (n = 9) were administered pulsed-flow oxygen (192 mL per bolus) by nasal insufflation during inspiration for 15 minutes PI, then breathed ambient air. The study was performed at 1300 m above sea level. One-way and two-way repeated-measures anova with post-hoc Bonferroni tests were used for within and between-group comparisons, respectively. Significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.ResultsMean ± SD PaO2 in controls at 0, 15 and 30 minutes PI were 46 ± 7 mmHg (6.1 ± 0.9 kPa), 42 ± 9 mmHg (5.6 ± 1.1 kPa), and 48 ± 7 mmHg (6.4 ± 0.1 kPa), respectively (p = 0.4). In treatment animals, oxygen administration significantly increased PaO2 at 15 minutes PI to 60 ± 13 mmHg (8.0 ± 1.7 kPa), compared with baseline values of 46 ± 8 mmHg (6.1 ± 1 kPa) (p = 0.007), and 30 minute PI values of 48 ± 7 mmHg (6.5 ± 0.9 kPa) (p = 0.003).ConclusionsThese data show that a pulsed-flow delivery of oxygen can increase PaO2 in dorsally recumbent horses during field anesthesia with ketamine-xylazine-guaifenesin.Clinical relevanceThe portable oxygen concentrator may help combat hypoxemia during field anesthesia in horses.  相似文献   

10.
ObjectivesTo compare the anaesthetic, analgesic and cardiorespiratory effects of intramuscular (IM) medetomidine and ketamine administered alone or combined with morphine or tramadol, for orchiectomy in cats.Study designRandomised, blinded, prospective clinical study.AnimalsThirty client-owned cats.Materials and methodsCats (n = 10 in each group) received a combination of medetomidine (60 μgkg?1) and ketamine (10 mg kg?1) alone (MedK); combined with morphine (0.2 mg kg?1) (MedKM), or combined with tramadol (2 mg kg?1) (MedKT) IM. Time of induction, surgical and recovery events were recorded, and physiological parameters measured and recorded. Analgesia was evaluated with a visual analogue scale, a composite scoring system and the von Frey mechanical threshold device, every hour from three to eight hours post-drug administration injection. Data were analyzed with a linear mixed model, Kruskal–Wallis or Chi-square tests (p < 0.05).ResultsMedian (IQR) induction and recovery times (minutes) were not significantly (p = 0.125) different between groups: 5.6 (2.7–8.0), 7.4 (5.1–9.6) and 8.0 (5.8–14.9) for induction and 128.5 (95.1–142.8), 166.4 (123.1–210.0) and 142.9 (123.4–180.2) for recovery, with MedK, MedKT and MedKM, respectively. Two cats (MedKM) required alfaxalone for endotracheal intubation. In all groups, three or four cats required additional isoflurane for surgery. Arterial oxygen tension overall (mean ± SD: 66 ± 2 mmHg) was low. Surgery resulted in increased systolic arterial blood pressure (p < 0.001), haemoglobin saturation (p < 0.001), respiratory (p = 0.003) and heart rates (p = 0.002). Pain scores did not differ significantly between groups. Von Frey responses decreased over time; changes over time varied by treatment (p < 0.001), MedK returning to baseline values more rapidly than MedKM and MedKT. No cat required rescue analgesics.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAll three protocols can provide adequate anaesthesia and analgesia for orchiectomy in cats. However, rescue intervention to maintain surgical anaesthesia may be required in some cats. Oxygen supplementation is advised.  相似文献   

11.
ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare the cardiopulmonary effects of induction of anesthesia with isoflurane (Iso), ketamine–diazepam (KD), or propofol–diazepam (PD) in hypovolemic dogs.Study designProspective randomized cross–over trial.AnimalsSix healthy intact, mixed breed, female dogs weighing 20.7 ± 4.2 kg and aged 22 ± 2 months.MethodsDogs had 30 mL kg?1 of blood removed at a rate of 1.5 mL kg?1 minute?1 under isoflurane anesthesia. Following a 30–minute recovery period, anesthesia was reinduced. Dogs were assigned to one of three treatments: isoflurane via facemask using 0.5% incremental increases in the delivered concentration every 30 seconds, 1.25 mg kg?1 ketamine and 0.0625 mg kg?1 diazepam intravenously (IV) with doses repeated every 30 seconds as required, and 2 mg kg?1 propofol and 0.2 mg kg?1 diazepam IV followed by 1 mg kg?1 propofol increments IV every 30 seconds as required. Following endotracheal intubation all dogs received 1.7% end–tidal isoflurane in oxygen. Cardiopulmonary variables were recorded at baseline (before induction) and at 5 or 10 minute intervals following endotracheal intubation.ResultsInduction time was longer in Iso (4.98 ± 0.47 minutes) compared to KD (3.10 ± 0.47 minutes) or PD (3.22 ± 0.45 minutes). To produce anesthesia, KD received 4.9 ± 2.3 mg kg?1 ketamine and 0.24 ± 0.1 mg kg?1 diazepam, while PD received 2.2 ± 0.4 mg kg?1 propofol and 0.2 mg kg?1 diazepam. End–tidal isoflurane concentration immediately following intubation was 1.7 ± 0.4% in Iso. Arterial blood pressure and heart rate were significantly higher in KD and PD compared to Iso and in KD compared to PD. Arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure was significantly higher in PD compared to KD and Iso immediately after induction.Conclusions and clinical relevanceIn hypovolemic dogs, KD or PD, as used in this study to induce anesthesia, resulted in less hemodynamic depression compared to isoflurane.  相似文献   

12.

Objective

To compare the effect of propofol and ketamine/diazepam for induction following premedication on intraocular pressure (IOP) in healthy dogs.

Study design

Prospective, quasi-experimental, unmasked, longitudinal.

Animals

A total of 61 client-owned dogs.

Methods

Dogs were anesthetized twice with a 4 week washout period. Premedication with dexmedetomidine (5 μg kg–1) and hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg–1) intramuscularly was followed by either propofol (4 mg kg–1) or ketamine (5 mg kg–1) and diazepam (0.25 mg kg–1) intravenously for induction and inhaled isoflurane for maintenance. IOP was measured by applanation tonometry using TonoPen-XL before premedication and after 5, 10, 20 and 30 minutes. IOP was measured again immediately after induction and after 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 and 40 minutes. Data were analyzed using one- or two-way repeated measures ANOVA.

Results

No difference was found between right and left IOP (p = 0.45), and data from both the eyes of each dog were averaged and considered as one set of data. Following premedication, IOP was significantly lower at all time points than at baseline when animals were grouped together, mean difference –1.6 ± 0.2 mmHg (p < 0.05). IOP increased immediately (12.2 ± 2.4 mmHg before versus 17.1 ± 3.8 mmHg after) and at 3, 5 (p < 0.001), 10 and 40 minutes (p = 0.009 and 0.045, respectively) after propofol administration. For ketamine/diazepam, IOP was increased immediately post-induction (13.0 ± 2.7 mmHg before versus 14.7 ± 2.8 mmHg after) and at 3, 5 (p < 0.001), 30 and 40 minutes (p = 0.010 and 0.037, respectively).

Conclusions and clinical relevance

Sedation with hydromorphone and dexmedetomidine significantly decreased IOP in normal dogs and may be an appropriate choice for dogs that cannot tolerate acute increases in IOP. However, IOP increased significantly after both induction protocols, abolishing the effect of premedication.  相似文献   

13.
Objective To determine the effects of intravenous ketamine‐midazolam anesthesia on intraocular pressure (IOP) in ocular normotensive dogs. Animals Thirteen adult mixed‐breed dogs. Procedures Dogs were randomly assigned to treatment (n = 7) and control (n = 6) groups. Dogs in the treatment group received intravenous ketamine 15 mg/kg and midazolam 0.2 mg/kg and dogs in the control group received intravenous saline. The time of intravenous drug injection was recorded (T0). Measurements of IOP were then repeated 5 min (T5) and 20 min (T20) following the intravenous administration of ketamine‐midazolam combination and saline in both groups. Results Measurements showed normal IOP values in both groups. The mean ± SD baseline IOP values for treatment and control groups were 13.00 ± 1.47 and 10.33 ± 2.20, respectively. For baseline IOP values, there was no significant difference between treatment and control groups (P = 0.162). In the treatment group, the subsequent post‐treatment mean ± SD values were 15.64 ± 2.17 (5 min), and 14.92 ± 1.98 (20 min). There was no evidence of statistical difference between baseline values and post‐treatment values after treatment with ketamine‐midazolam (P5 = 0.139; P20 = 0.442). In control eyes, the mean ± SD values at 5 and 20 min were 10.41 ± 2.01 and 10.16 ± 1.69, respectively. There was no significant difference between baseline values and post‐treatment values in control group (P5 = 1.000; P20 = 1.000). Conclusion Ketamine‐midazolam combination has no clinically significant effect on IOP in the dog.  相似文献   

14.
ObjectiveTo determine the effects of ketamine-diazepam and ketamine-acepromazine combinations on intraocular pressure (IOP) in rabbits.Study designRandomized clinical trial.AnimalsSixteen adult New Zealand white rabbits approximately one year old, weighing 2.3 ± 0.2 kg were used in this study.MethodsThe animals were randomly divided into two groups of eight each (KA and KD). The pre-treatment IOPs were recorded in both groups (T0). All rabbits in group KA received intramuscular ketamine-acepromazine (ketamine 30 mg kg?1+ acepromazine 0.5 mg kg?1). Ketamine-diazepam (ketamine 30 mg kg?1 + diazepam 1 mg kg?1) was administered intramuscularly in members of group KD. The IOP values were measured at 5 (T5), 15 (T15), and 20 (T20) minutes after drug administration in both treatment groups.ResultsSignificant increases in IOP values were observed in both treatment groups at T5, T15, and T20 in comparison to the baseline values. In group KA the mean ± SD IOP at T5, T15, and T20 were 37 ± 13 (p < 0.001), 35 ± 4 (p < 0.001) and 34 ± 4 mmHg (p < 0.001). The post-treatment mean ± sd values in group KD were 23 ± 8 (p = 0.002), 23 ± 5 (p < 0.001) and 23 ± 6 mmHg (p = 0.001) at 5, 15, and 20 minutes respectively.Conclusion and clinical relevanceBoth ketamine-diazepam and ketamine-acepromazine combinations increased IOP after intramuscular administration in rabbits.  相似文献   

15.
ObjectiveTo compare anaesthetic induction in healthy dogs using propofol or ketofol (a propofol-ketamine mixture).Study designProspective, randomized, controlled, ‘blinded’ study.AnimalsSeventy healthy dogs (33 males and 37 females), aged 6–157 months and weighing 4–48 kg.MethodsFollowing premedication, either propofol (10 mg mL?1) or ketofol (9 mg propofol and 9 mg ketamine mL?1) was titrated intravenously until laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were possible. Pulse rate (PR), respiratory rate (fR) and arterial blood pressure (ABP) were compared to post-premedication values and time to first breath (TTFB) recorded. Sedation quality, tracheal intubation and anaesthetic induction were scored by an observer who was unaware of treatment group. Mann–Whitney or t-tests were performed and significance set at p = 0.05.ResultsInduction mixture volume (mean ± SD) was lower for ketofol (0.2 ± 0.1 mL kg?1) than propofol (0.4 ± 0.1 mL kg?1) (p < 0.001). PR increased following ketofol (by 35 ± 20 beats minute?1) but not consistently following propofol (4 ± 16 beats minute?1) (p < 0.001). Ketofol administration was associated with a higher mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (82 ± 10 mmHg) than propofol (77 ± 11) (p = 0.05). TTFB was similar, but ketofol use resulted in a greater decrease in fR (median (range): ketofol -32 (-158 to 0) propofol -24 (-187 to 2) breaths minute?1) (p < 0.001). Sedation was similar between groups. Tracheal intubation and induction qualities were better with ketofol than propofol (p = 0.04 and 0.02 respectively).Conclusion and clinical relevanceInduction of anaesthesia with ketofol resulted in higher PR and MAP than when propofol was used, but lower fR. Quality of induction and tracheal intubation were consistently good with ketofol, but more variable when using propofol.  相似文献   

16.
Objective To estimate mean Schirmer tear test (STT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) values in healthy koalas both conscious and anesthetized. Methods Data were gathered from koalas in Victoria, Australia. Conscious examinations were performed on captive koalas. Free‐ranging (wild) koalas were examined under anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced using alfaxalone, and animals were maintained on oxygen and isoflurane if required. All animals were healthy and had no surface ocular pathology detectable during slit lamp biomicroscopy. STT I tests were performed using commercial STT test strips placed in the lower fornix for 1 min. IOP was measured using an applanation tonometer after topical anesthesia. The higher value of the two eyes for both STT and IOP was analyzed. STT was measured in 53 koalas (34 conscious, 19 anesthetized) and IOP was measured in 43 koalas (30 conscious, 13 anesthetized). A two‐sample t‐test was used to compare means. A P‐value <0.05 was regarded as significant. Mean ± SD is presented. Results The mean higher STT in conscious koalas was 10.3 ± 3.6 mm wetting/min and in anesthetized koalas it decreased to 3.8 ± 4.0 mm wetting/min (P < 0.0001). The mean higher IOP in conscious koalas was 15.3 ± 5.1 mmHg, and in anesthetized koalas it was 13.8 ± 3.4 mmHg (P = 0.32). There was no effect of sex on either STT or IOP. Conclusions The mean and SD of STT and IOP values for koalas both conscious and anesthetized were reported. The mean STT was significantly reduced by alfaxalone anesthesia.  相似文献   

17.
ObjectiveTo determine the alfaxalone dose reduction during total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) when combined with ketamine or midazolam constant rate infusions and to assess recovery quality in healthy dogs.Study designProspective, blinded clinical study.AnimalsA group of 33 healthy, client-owned dogs subjected to dental procedures.MethodsAfter premedication with intramuscular acepromazine 0.05 mg kg-1 and methadone 0.3 mg kg-1, anaesthetic induction started with intravenous alfaxalone 0.5 mg kg-1 followed by either lactated Ringer’s solution (0.04 mL kg-1, group A), ketamine (2 mg kg-1, group AK) or midazolam (0.2 mg kg-1, group AM) and completed with alfaxalone until endotracheal intubation was achieved. Anaesthesia was maintained with alfaxalone (6 mg kg-1 hour-1), adjusted (±20%) every 5 minutes to maintain a suitable level of anaesthesia. Ketamine (0.6 mg kg-1 hour-1) or midazolam (0.4 mg kg-1 hour-1) were employed for anaesthetic maintenance in groups AK and AM, respectively. Physiological variables were monitored during anaesthesia. Times from alfaxalone discontinuation to extubation, sternal recumbency and standing position were calculated. Recovery quality and incidence of adverse events were recorded. Groups were compared using parametric analysis of variance and nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, Fisher’s exact) tests as appropriate, p < 0.05.ResultsMidazolam significantly reduced alfaxalone induction and maintenance doses (46%; p = 0.034 and 32%, p = 0.012, respectively), whereas ketamine only reduced the alfaxalone induction dose (30%; p = 0.010). Recovery quality was unacceptable in nine dogs in group A, three dogs in group AK and three dogs in group AM.Conclusions and clinical relevanceMidazolam, but not ketamine, reduced the alfaxalone infusion rate, and both co-adjuvant drugs reduced the alfaxalone induction dose. Alfaxalone TIVA allowed anaesthetic maintenance for dental procedures in dogs, but the quality of anaesthetic recovery remained unacceptable irrespective of its combination with ketamine or midazolam.  相似文献   

18.
  相似文献   

19.
ObjectiveTo compare blind and endoscopic-guided techniques for orotracheal intubation in rabbits and the number of intubation attempts with laryngeal/tracheal damage.Study designProspective, randomized experimental study.AnimalsA total of 24 healthy, intact female New Zealand White rabbits, weighing 2.2 ± 0.2 kg (mean ± standard deviation).MethodsRabbits were randomly assigned to blind (group B) or endoscopic-guided (group E) orotracheal intubation with a 2.0 mm internal diameter uncuffed tube. Intramuscular (IM) alfaxalone (7 mg kg–1), hydromorphone (0.1 mg kg–1) and dexmedetomidine (0.005 mg kg–1) were administered, and additional IM alfaxalone (3–5 mg kg–1) and dexmedetomidine (0.025 mg kg–1) were administered to rabbits with strong jaw tone. An intubation attempt was defined as the advancement of the endotracheal tube from the incisors to the laryngeal entrance. Tracheal intubation was confirmed via capnography and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane for 2 hours. Following euthanasia, laryngeal and tracheal tissues were submitted for histopathology. Quality of anesthesia for orotracheal intubation, intubation procedure and tissue damage were numerically scored. Data were analyzed using Poisson regression, Spearman’s correlation, t test, mixed anova, Mann–Whitney U test, Friedman and Chi square tests as appropriate.ResultsMedian (range) intubation attempts were 2 (1–8) and 1 (1–3) for groups B and E, respectively. More rabbits in group E (91.6%) required additional alfaxalone and dexmedetomidine than in group B (16.7%). Median (range) cumulative histopathology scores were 6 (3–10) and 6 (2–9) for groups B and E, respectively. Scores were highest in the cranial trachea, but there was no difference between groups and no correlation between laryngeal/tracheal damage and the number of intubation attempts.Conclusions and clinical relevanceBoth orotracheal intubation techniques were associated with laryngeal/tracheal damage. Although blind orotracheal intubation was associated with a higher number of attempts, the tissue damage was similar between groups.  相似文献   

20.
  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号