| Literature DB >> 30180855 |
Hirotaka Tokushige1, Asuka Kushiro2, Atsushi Okano2, Tatsuya Maeda2, Hideki Ito2, Ai Wakuno3, Shun-Ichi Nagata4, Minoru Ohta5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alfaxalone has a number of pharmacological properties which are desirable for constant rate infusion (CRI). Previously, the co-administration of alfaxalone and medetomidine is shown to be suitable for short-term anesthesia in horses. However, the use of alfaxalone-medetomidine CRI with inhalational anesthesia under surgical procedures have not been investigated in clinical cases. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of alfaxalone-medetomidine CRI in sevoflurane-anesthetized Thoroughbred racehorses undergoing arthroscopic surgery. Sevoflurane requirement, cardiovascular function, and induction/recovery quality were compared between horses maintained with sevoflurane in combination with medetomidine CRI (3 µg/kg/h) (Group M; n = 25) and those maintained with sevoflurane in combination with alfaxalone-medetomidine CRI (0.5 mg/kg/h and 3 µg/kg/h, respectively) (Group AM; n = 25).Entities:
Keywords: Alfaxalone–medetomidine; Constant rate infusion; Equine anesthesia; Racehorse; Recovery; Sevoflurane
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30180855 PMCID: PMC6123962 DOI: 10.1186/s13028-018-0406-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Vet Scand ISSN: 0044-605X Impact factor: 1.695
Fig. 1Mean end-tidal sevoflurane concentration during the maintenance of anesthesia. Horses in Group M (n = 25) (black square) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with medetomidine CRI; horses in Group AM (n = 25) (black circle) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with alfaxalone–medetomidine CRI. *Significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.001), P: probability
Cardiovascular parameters during the maintenance of anesthesia in the horses of Group M and Group AM
| Variable | Group | Time after connection to breathing circuit (min) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 15 | 30 | 45 | 60 | ||
| HR (beats/min) | M | 30 ± 3 | 27 ± 3 | 26 ± 3 | 27 ± 3 | 27 ± 3 |
| AM | 31 ± 4 | 28 ± 4 | 27 ± 3 | 27 ± 3 | 28 ± 3 | |
| SAP (mmHg) | M | n/a | 93 ± 8 | 97 ± 8 | 101 ± 9 | 104 ± 9 |
| AM | n/a | 94 ± 6 | 102 ± 10 | 104 ± 9 | 101 ± 4 | |
| DAP (mmHg) | M | n/a | 51 ± 8 | 54 ± 7 | 55 ± 7 | 56 ± 7 |
| AM | n/a | 51 ± 7 | 59 ± 6 | 60 ± 7 | 57 ± 6 | |
| MAP (mmHg) | M | n/a | 63 ± 8 | 68 ± 7 | 70 ± 7 | 71 ± 7 |
| AM | n/a | 64 ± 7 | 73 ± 5 | 74 ± 4 | 72 ± 5 | |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD)
Horses in Group M (n = 25) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with medetomidine CRI; horses in Group AM (n = 25) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with alfaxalone–medetomidine CRI
HR heart rate, SAP systolic arterial blood pressure, DAP diastolic arterial blood pressure, MAP mean arterial blood pressure, n/a not applicable
Fig. 2Induction scores (a) and recovery scores (b). Horses in Group M (n = 25) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with medetomidine CRI; horses in Group AM (n = 25) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with alfaxalone–medetomidine CRI
Fig. 3Plasma alfaxalone concentration immediately after induction, during maintenance, and after standing in Group AM. Horses in Group AM (n = 25) were maintained with sevoflurane in combination with alfaxalone–medetomidine CRI. *Significantly different from the values immediately after induction of anesthesia (P < 0.01), ※significantly different from the values immediately after induction of anesthesia and during sevoflurane maintenance (P < 0.01), P: probability