A narrative review of caudal epidural anaesthesia and analgesia in horses. Part 2: Clinical indications and techniques

Retroperitoneoscopy of the presacral space in horses: Surgical access and anatomy

BACKGROUND

Surgical approaches to the equine rectum and perirectal area are described in the literature. However, surgeries in this region can be challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the surgical anatomy of the presacral space and to evaluate its access using a retroperitoneoscopic approach.

STUDY DESIGN

Ex vivo experiment.

METHODS

Preliminary dissections were performed in two cadavers to define the boundaries of the presacral space and to determine portal locations for the surgical approach. After that, nine cadavers were used for experimental presacral retroperitoneoscopic procedure in a standing position. Following retroperitoneoscopy, cadavers were dissected to confirm the anatomical structures observed during the endoscopic procedures, to control the location of each portal and to record iatrogenic trauma.

RESULTS

The presacral space was bordered by the vertebral column from the ventral aspect of lumbosacral promontorium to the first coccygeal vertebra dorsally and by the presacral fascia and peritoneum ventrally. Lateral limits were composed of the sacrosciatic ligament and transversalis fascia. Cranial and caudal borders were composed of the peritoneum and coccygeal and levator ani muscles respectively. Retroperitoneoscopic portals were placed between the external anal sphincter and semimembranosus muscles and between the base of the tail and the external anal sphincter muscle through the anococcygeal fascia to enter the space by its caudal border. The retroperitoneal space was reached in all cases and the dorsal and lateral aspects of the rectum were visualised after creation of a working space.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

Use of cadaver specimens do not permit to evaluate the tolerance in living animals and the surgical complications such as rectal damage, haemorrhage and infection.

CONCLUSION

This study provides an anatomical description and surgical access of the presacral space with a minimal invasive approach. Retroperitoneoscopy allows access to the rectum and the dorsal aspect of the pelvis.

Comparative evaluation of sedative and anti-nociceptive effects of epidural romifidine, romifidine-lidocaine, and lidocaine in donkeys (Equus asinus)

Background

Local and regional anesthetic procedures are valuable tools in veterinary practice. Caudal epidural administration of local anesthetic agents is widely reported for surgical interventions of the tail, anus, rectum, vulva, vagina, urethra, and bladder in the standing horse. Epidural analgesia is also obtained using various drugs such as alpha-2 adrenoceptor agonists, dissociative anesthetics, and opioids. The present study evaluates the anti-nociceptive and sedative effects of epidural administration of romifidine, a romifidine-lidocaine combination, and lidocaine alone in donkeys.

Materials and methods

In a randomized prospective study, twenty-four healthy adult donkeys were assigned to four groups (three experimental and one control; n = 6) received either 50 μg/kg of romifidine, 0.30 mg/kg of lidocaine, combined romifidine (50 μg/kg) and lidocaine (0.30 mg/kg) diluted in 0.9% sterile normal saline solution to a total injection volume of 12 ml, or an equivalent volume of sterile saline epidurally. After epidural injection of each treatment, the onset, degree, and duration of sedation and anatomical extension of anti-nociception were documented. Observations began immediately (time 0) pre-administration and at 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 30-min intervals subsequently until 210 min after drug injection. Time to onset of perineal analgesia was documented every minute after the epidural injection by evaluating the animal's response to pinpricks.

Results

Only romifidine and romifidine-lidocaine induced mild to moderate sedation. Romifidine, romifidine-lidocaine, and lidocaine induced complete bilateral caudal epidural analgesia with loss of sensation in the perineum, tail, inguinal region, caudal aspect of the upper hind limb, chest areas, and extended distally to the dorsal metatarsal area. Sedation lasted longer (p < 0.05) with romifidine (160 ± 15.4 min) than with romifidine-lidocaine (141.6 ± 13.2 min). Longer-lasting analgesia (p < 0.05) was obtained with romifidine (158.3 ± 9.8 min) and romifidine-lidocaine (165 ± 9.4 min) than with lidocaine (75.8 ± 8 min).

Conclusions

Epidural administration of a single dose of romifidine or a combination of romifidine-lidocaine produced mild to moderate sedation and complete anti-nociception in the perineal and inguinal regions of donkeys. The clinical usefulness of epidural romifidine or romifidine-lidocaine combinations to perform obstetric procedures in donkeys needs to be assessed.

Caudal epidural catheterization for pain management in 48 hospitalized horses: A descriptive study of demographics, complications, and outcomes

The placement of caudal epidural catheters in horses has become more frequent as a multi-modal analgesic strategy. Despite its integration into clinical practice, there are limited reports describing the use of caudal epidural catheterization for prolonged use in horses. The purpose of this study was to characterize the hospitalized caseload undergoing epidural catheterization for long-term epidural analgesic administration, to report the response to epidural therapy and observed complications, and to describe patient outcomes. Medical records of hospitalized equine patients that underwent placement of a caudal epidural catheter for analgesic management between 2017 and 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. For the 62 catheters placed in the 48 cases, the most frequent diagnosis category prompting epidural analgesia was orthopedic (43/48, 89.6%). Synovial sepsis was the most frequent specific diagnosis prompting epidural catheter placement (11/48, 22.9%). The initial response to epidural therapy was characterized as positive for 37/62 (59.7%) catheters. Complications were documented for 46/62 (74.2%) catheters. However, most of these complications were classified as mild (51.6%) or moderate (14.5%), and exaggerated physiologic responses were observed most frequently. Of the horses studied, 52.1% survived to be discharged from the hospital. With awareness of potential complications and vigilant monitoring, caudal epidural catheters should be considered for equine patients as an analgesic strategy.

Comparative Study of the Sedative and Anti-nociceptive Effects of Sacrococcygeal Epidural Administration of Romifidine, Lidocaine, and Romifidine/Lidocaine in the Dromedary Camel

In a randomized prospective study, comparative sedative and anti-nociceptive effects of epidural administration of romifidine (RO), lidocaine (LD), and a combination of romifidine-lidocaine (ROLD) in camel were evaluated. Eighteen healthy adult dromedary camels were assigned randomly to three treatment groups (n = 6), each receiving 50 μg/kg of RO, 0.30 mg/kg of LD, or a combination of both RO and LD. All treatments were expanded in 0.9% sterile normal saline solution to a final dose volume of 20 ml and administered directly into the sacrococcygeal space. After epidural injection of each treatment, the onset time, duration, anatomical extension of anti-nociception, and sedation were documented. Anti-nociception was tested at different areas using a pinprick test and artery forceps pinching at the perineum and inguinal area. RO and ROLD treatments resulted in mild to severe sedation and complete bilateral analgesia with loss of sensation in the tail, perineum, scrotum in males, vulva in females, the caudal aspect skin of the upper hind limb, and inguinal region (udder in females and the prepuce in males). The anatomic extent of anti-nociception reached the chest cranially and the footpad distally. Camels who received LD showed the shortest duration (P &lt; 0.001) to the onset of perineal anti-nociception (3.67 ± 0.33 min) followed by those who received RO LD (4.00 ± 0.37 min) and RO (6.67 ± 0.33 min), respectively. RO and ROLD resulted in significantly (P &lt; 0.001) longer periods of analgesia (158.33 ± 4.01 min and 165 ± 3.87 min, respectively) than LD (75.83 ± 3.27). An epidural RO and ROLD would appear to produce a very effective and acceptable anti-nociceptive effect in the perineal and inguinal regions of camels.