Epidural administration of opioid analgesics improves quality of recovery in horses anaesthetised for treatment of hindlimb synovial sepsis

Clinical predictive models in equine medicine: A systematic review

Clinical predictive models use a patient's baseline demographic and clinical data to make predictions about patient outcomes and have the potential to aid clinical decision making. The extent of equine clinical predictive models is unknown in the literature. Using PubMed and Google Scholar, we systematically reviewed the predictive models currently described for use in equine patients. Models were eligible for inclusion if they were published in a peer-reviewed article as a multivariable model used to predict a clinical/laboratory/imaging outcome in an individual horse or herd. The agreement of at least two authors was required for model inclusion. We summarised the patient populations, model development methods, performance metric reporting, validation efforts, and, using the Predictive model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), assessed the risk of bias and applicability concerns for these models. In addition, we summarised the index conditions for which models were developed and provided detailed information on included models. A total of 90 predictive models and 9 external validation studies were included in the final systematic review. A plurality of models (41%) was developed to predict outcomes associated with colic, for example, need for surgery or survival to discharge. All included models were at high risk of bias, defined as failing one or more PROBAST signalling questions, primarily for analysis-related reasons. Importantly, a high risk of bias does not necessarily mean that models are unusable, but that they require more careful consideration prior to clinical use. Concerns about applicability were low for the majority of models. Systematic reviews such as this can serve to increase veterinarians' awareness of predictive models, including evaluation of their performance and their use in different patient populations.

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.

Recovery of horses from general anaesthesia: A systematic review (2000-2020) of the influence of anaesthetic protocol on recovery quality

BACKGROUND

The recovery phase after equine general anaesthesia (GA) is a time of considerable risk and therefore has been the subject of extensive research over the last 20 years. Various pharmacological interventions have been developed and studied with the objective of improving recovery quality and reducing anaesthetic-related mortality and morbidity. Nevertheless, some controversy remains regarding the influence of anaesthetic protocol choice on recovery quality from GA and its implications for recovery-related mortality and morbidity. A systematic review of the literature investigating the influence of anaesthetic protocol choice on recovery quality is currently lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a detailed evaluation of the equine veterinary literature investigating the effect of anaesthetic protocol choice on equine recovery quality utilising the GRADE framework.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic evaluation of the equine veterinary literature was performed using the GRADE framework.

METHODS

A literature search was performed and studies were assessed for eligibility by both authors utilising PRISMA guidelines. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated by both authors, categorically summarised and the quality of evidence for each sub-topic was assessed using the GRADE framework.

RESULTS

A total of 124 studies were identified which directly assessed the impact of anaesthetic protocol choice on recovery quality after GA in horses. Evaluation of the available evidence indicated that certain partial intravenous anaesthesia (PIVA) agents, cessation of intravenous lidocaine 30 minutes prior to recovery and provision of adequate analgesia improves recovery quality.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

The validity of the results of some studies may have been compromised by missing data and small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to indicate that certain PIVA agents, cessation of intravenous lidocaine 30 minutes prior to recovery and provision of adequate analgesia improves recovery quality.

Head and tail rope-assisted recovery improves quality of recovery from general anaesthesia in horses undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy

BACKGROUND

In equine anaesthesia, the recovery period is critical, accounting for most anaesthesia-related fatalities reported. Horses may recover unassisted or may be assisted, for example, using a head and tail rope recovery method.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the impact of head and tail rope and unassisted recovery method on quality of recovery in horses undergoing colic surgery under general anaesthesia (GA).

STUDY DESIGN

Single centre retrospective cross-sectional study, with prospective model performance analysis.

METHODS

Clinical data were obtained from horses undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy over a 6-year period. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the perioperative factors that affect quality of recovery. The final prediction model was assessed prospectively.

RESULTS

Records from 502 general anaesthetics (490 horses) were included. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that head and tail rope recovery (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.3, P < .001) and sevoflurane administration (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.3, P = .02) were associated with better quality of recovery when compared with unassisted recovery and isoflurane administration respectively. Increasing GA duration (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.99-1.0, P = .03), increasing intraoperative dosages (in mg/kg) of thiopental (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.98, P = .02) or ketamine (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99, P = .04) were linked to poor quality of recovery. No statistically significant difference was found between recovery groups in terms of mortality.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

The clinical prediction model obtained is only applicable to the specific facilities, recovery methodology, referral population and anaesthetic protocols practiced at our institution.

CONCLUSIONS

Head and tail rope recovery is significantly associated with better quality of recovery, compared with unassisted recovery, in horses undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy. Sevoflurane administration, in detriment of isoflurane, was associated with better quality of recovery. Other risk factors, such as increasing GA duration, the use of higher intra-operative dosages of ketamine and/or thiopental, were associated with poor quality of recovery.

Recovery of horses from general anaesthesia: A systematic review (2000-2020) of risk factors and influence of interventions during the recovery period

BACKGROUND

In equine anaesthesia, the recovery period is a time of considerable risk and has been the focus of prolific research. Risk factors, including age, type and duration of procedure or temperament may influence recovery quality. Unfortunately, the anaesthetist is unable to control for these factors, therefore various pharmacological interventions and recovery methods have been developed with the objective of improving recovery quality. However, no consensus among anaesthetists has been reached for many of these interventions and their implications for recovery-related mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review of the published evidence relating to risk factors and interventions in the recovery period which may influence recovery quality from equine general anaesthesia (GA).

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic evaluation of the equine veterinary literature using the GRADE framework.

METHODS

A literature search was performed and studies were assessed for eligibility by both authors utilising PRISMA guidelines. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated by both authors, categorically summarised and the quality of evidence for each sub-topic was assessed using the GRADE framework.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies were identified which directly assessed the impact of risk factors and recovery interventions on recovery quality after equine GA. There was evidence to support that peri-anaesthetic risk factors such as anaesthesia duration, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status and surgical procedure influenced recovery quality. We also identified sufficient evidence that administration of α-2 adrenoreceptor agonists immediately prior to recovery, improves recovery quality.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

The validity of the results of some studies may have been compromised by missing data and small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Recovery quality is influenced by factors including: anaesthesia duration, ASA physical status and surgical procedure. Recovery quality can be improved by the administration of an α-2 adrenoreceptor agonist immediately prior to recovery.

Recovery after General Anaesthesia in Adult Horses: A Structured Summary of the Literature

Simple Summary

Recovery is the most dangerous phase of general anaesthesia in horses. Numerous publications have reported about this phase, but structured reviews that try to reduce the risk of bias of narrative reviews/expert opinions, focussing on the topic are missing. Therefore, the aim of the present article was to publish the first structured review as a summary of the literature focussing on the recovery phase after general anaesthesia in horses. The objective was to summarise the available literature, taking into account the scientific evidence of the individual studies. A structured approach was followed with two experts in the field independently deciding on article inclusion and its level of scientific evidence. A total number of 444 articles, sorted by topics and classified based on their levels of evidence, were finally included into the present summary. The most important findings were summarised and discussed. The present structured review can be used as a compilation of the publications that, to date, focus on the recovery phase after general anaesthesia in adult horses. This type of review tries to minimise the risk of bias inherent to narrative reviews/expert opinions.

Abstract

Recovery remains the most dangerous phase of general anaesthesia in horses. The objective of this publication was to perform a structured literature review including levels of evidence (LoE) of each study with the keywords “recovery anaesthesia horse”, entered at once, in the search browsers PubMed and Web of Science. The two authors independently evaluated each candidate article. A final list with 444 articles was obtained on 5 April 2021, classified as: 41 “narrative reviews/expert opinions”, 16 “retrospective outcome studies”, 5 “surveys”, 59 “premedication/sedation and induction drugs”, 27 “maintenance with inhalant agents”, 55 “maintenance with total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA)”, 3 “TIVA versus inhalants”, 56 “maintenance with partial intravenous anaesthesia (PIVA)”, 27 “other drugs used during maintenance”, 18 “drugs before/during recovery”, 18 “recovery systems”, 21 “respiratory system in recovery”, 41 “other factors”, 51 “case series/reports” and 6 “systems to score recoveries”. Of them, 167 were LoE 1, 36 LoE 2, 33 LoE 3, 110 LoE 4, 90 LoE 5 and 8 could not be classified based on the available abstract. This review can be used as an up-to-date compilation of the literature about recovery after general anaesthesia in adult horses that tried to minimise the bias inherent to narrative reviews.