Effect of Medetomidine, Dexmedetomidine, and Their Reversal with Atipamezole on the Nociceptive Withdrawal Reflex in Beagles

How Is the Nociceptive Withdrawal Reflex Influenced by Increasing Doses of Propofol in Pigs?

The nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR) is a physiological, polysynaptic spinal reflex occurring in response to noxious stimulations. Continuous NWR threshold (NWRt) tracking has been shown to be possibly useful in the depth of anesthesia assessment. The primary aim of this study was to describe how propofol modulates the NWRt over time in pigs. Five juvenile pigs (anesthetized three times) were included. An intravenous (IV) infusion of propofol (20 mg/kg/h) was started, and boli were administered to effect until intubation. Afterwards, the infusion was increased every ten minutes by 6 mg/kg/h, together with an IV bolus of 0.5 mg/kg, until reaching an electroencephalographic suppression ratio (SR) of between 10% and 30%. The NWRt was continuously monitored. For data analysis, the time span between 15 min following intubation and the end of propofol infusion was considered. Individual durations of propofol administration were divided into five equal time intervals for each pig (TI1-TI5). A linear regression between NWRt and TI was performed for each pig. Moreover, the baseline NWRt and slopes of the linear regression (b1) were compared among days using a Friedman Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance on Ranks. The NWRt always increased with the propofol dose (b1 = 4.71 ± 3.23; mean ± standard deviation). No significant differences were found between the baseline NWRt and the b1 values. Our results suggest that the NWRt may complement the depth of anesthesia assessment in pigs receiving propofol.

COMPARISON OF THREE MIDAZOLAM-BASED SEDATION PROTOCOLS IN BUDGERIGARS (MELOPSITTACUS UNDULATUS) AND BLACK-CHEEKED LOVEBIRDS (AGAPORNIS NIGRIGENIS)

This randomized, crossover study evaluated three sedation protocols administered subcutaneously in nine budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and nine black-cheeked lovebirds (Agapornis nigrigenis). All protocols included midazolam (5 mg/kg), combined with butorphanol (5 mg/kg) (BM), medetomidine (20 lg/kg) (MM), or alfaxalone (13 mg/kg) (AM). Mortalities from suspected cardiorespiratory arrest were observed when AM was used in lovebirds, even after reduction of alfaxalone dosage to 3 mg/kg, and therefore this protocol was excluded from further use in this species. Induction and recovery times were recorded and their quality assessed. Sedation depth and heart and respiratory rates were measured every 5 min and radiographic positioning was attempted at 10 and 20 min. At 30 min, midazolam and medetomidine were reversed with flumazenil (0.05 mg/kg, SC), and atipamezole (0.2 mg/kg, SC), respectively. MM consistently provided deep sedation in both species, with successful radiographic positioning at every attempt. As expected, heart rate was often lower with MM than with other protocols, but no associated complications were noted. In budgerigars, BM had the lowest radiographic positioning success rate (10 min: 5/9, 20 min: 3/9), whereas in lovebirds it provided significantly deeper sedation (P < 0.001), allowing radiographic positioning in all subjects. In both species, BM provided the shortest recovery times. AM resulted in reliable radiographic positioning of all budgerigars at 10 min, but not at 20 min (5/ 9), and provided consistently poor recoveries. This study highlights how differently two psittacine species of similar size may react to the same sedation protocols. AM sedation cannot be fully reversed and produced significant undesirable effects, several of which have been previously reported with alfaxalone administration to avian species. The authors therefore caution against using alfaxalone-midazolam combinations in budgerigars and black-cheeked lovebirds. Both BM and MM provided reliable sedation in these species, and appear to be suitable alternatives to AM.

Investigation of the effect and availability of ketamine on electroencephalography in cats with temporal lobe epilepsy

In recent years, electroencephalography (EEG) in veterinary medicine has become important not only in the diagnosis of epilepsy, but also in determining the epileptogenic focus. In cats, sedation and immobilization, usually with medetomidine or dexmedetomidine, are necessary to place the electrodes and to obtain stable scalp EEG recordings. In this study, we hypothesized that, for cats with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), ketamine, a sedative/anesthetic and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) antagonist that activates the limbic system and is also used to treat refractory status epilepticus in dogs, would induce sufficient sedation and immobilization for EEG, as well as induce interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) that are more pronounced than those induced with medetomidine. We obtained EEG recordings from TLE cats and healthy cats administered either ketamine or medetomidine alone (study 1) or ketamine after medetomidine sedation (study 2). In study 1, the frequency of IEDs showed no statistically significant difference between ketamine and medetomidine in both TLE and healthy cats. Seizures were observed in 75% (9/12) cats of the TLE group with ketamine alone. When ketamine was administered after sedation with medetomidine (study 2), 3/18 cats in the TLE group developed generalized tonic-clonic seizure and 1/18 cats showed subclinical seizure activity. However, no seizures were observed in all healthy cats in both study 1 and study 2. Slow wave activity at 2-4 Hz was observed in many individuals after ketamine administration regardless studies and groups, and quantitative analysis in study 2 showed a trend toward increased delta band activities in both groups. While there was no significant difference in the count of IEDs between medetomidine and ketamine, ketamine caused seizures in cats with TLE similar to their habitual seizure type and with a higher seizure frequency. Our results suggest that ketamine may activate epileptiform discharges during EEG recordings. However, caution should be used for cats with TLE.

Antinociceptive, Sedative and Excitatory Effects of Intravenous Butorphanol Administered Alone or in Combination with Detomidine in Calves: A Prospective, Randomized, Blinded Cross-Over Study

(1) Background: The diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed under sedation or general anesthesia in bovines are numerous. The analgesic drugs that can be legally used are few, making perioperative analgesia challenging. (2) Methods: Calves were administered butorphanol 0.1 mg kg^-1 alone (SB) or combined with 0.02 mg kg^-1 of a detomidine (DB) IV. The antinociceptive effect (trigeminocervical reflex threshold (TCRt)), as well as the behavioral (sedation and excitation) and physiological (heart and respiratory rate) changes were investigated. Five time windows were defined: BL (30 min pre-injection), T1 (0-30 min post-injection (PI)), T2 (31-60 min PI), T3 (61-90 min PI) and T4 (91-120 min PI). (3) Results: Both groups had a significative increase in TCRt at T1-T4 compared to the BL. The TCRt was significatively higher in DB than in SB at T1, T2 and T4. Heart rate decreased significatively in DB compared to that in BL. Calves were significantly more sedated in the DB group, and significantly more excited in the SB group compared to the BL. (4) Conclusions: Butorphanol alone has a statistically significant antinociceptive effect, but it elicits marked excitation, limiting its clinical applicability under this dosing regimen. The co-administration of detomidine eliminated the excitatory effect and induced consistent sedation and a significantly more pronounced antinociceptive effect.

Intraocular pressure and cardiovascular effects of dexmedetomidine premedication and tiletamine-zolazepam for anesthetic induction in dogs

Background and Aim

The effect of anesthetic drugs on intraocular pressure (IOP) is an important concern in ophthalmic surgery. The impact of dexmedetomidine (DEX) combined with tiletamine-zolazepam on IOP is scarcely studied. This study aimed to evaluate IOP and cardiovascular effects in dogs after premedication with 5 μg/kg (DEX5) or 10 μg/kg (DEX10) of intramuscular DEX followed by intravenous tiletamine-zolazepam administration for induction of anesthesia in healthy dogs.

Materials and Methods

Eighteen dogs, American Society of Anesthesiologists I or II, without ocular abnormality were investigated. All dogs were randomly divided into the DEX5 (n = 9) and DEX10 groups (n = 9). The IOP, heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), oxygen saturation, and sedation scale were measured before premedication (baseline), after premedication at 5, 10, 15, and 20 min, after tiletamine-zolazepam administration, after endotracheal intubation, and post-operative.

Results

There were no significant differences between the groups at any time point. The DEX5 and DEX10 groups had significantly decreased HR values at 10 min compared with baseline. The IOP at 20 min was significantly lower compared to the baseline in the DEX10 group. Moreover, the DEX10 group showed increased IOP, HR, SBP, and sedation scale values after induction and intubation compared with 20 min, but these values did not differ significantly from baseline. All parameters of both groups did not change significantly between post-operative and baseline.

Conclusion

Intramuscular DEX (10 μg/kg) is an appropriate premedication in ophthalmic examination or surgical procedures. Moreover, it could be combined with tiletamine-zolazepam for generalized anesthesia in dogs with an ophthalmic problem, as it had no clinically significant effects on IOP or cardiovascular values.

Dexmedetomidine Effectively Sedates Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus)

Simple Summary

Sedation in standing procedures is commonly performed in elephants. To successfully and safely initiate standing in elephants, chemical restraint drugs should provide sufficient sedation with minimal complications (i.e., recumbency, significant physiologic alterations, and prolonged recovery). This study investigated the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine in Asian elephants. Results suggest dexmedetomidine 1–2 µg/kg provides effective sedation. However, we suggest a single intramuscular dexmedetomidine injection of 2 µg/kg for approximately 70 min of sedation. This is the first study to demonstrate dexmedetomidine use in Asian elephants.

Abstract

This study investigated the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine in Asian elephants. We hypothesized that 2 µg/kg dexmedetomidine would provide sufficient standing sedation. A crossover design study was performed in three Asian elephants. Each elephant was assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups—1 (D1), 1.5 (D1.5) or 2 (D2) µg/kg dexmedetomidine (intramuscular injection, IM) with a two-week ‘washout period’ between doses. Elephants were monitored for 120 min. At 120 min (Ta), atipamezole was administered IM. Sedation and responsiveness scores were evaluated. Physiological parameters (pulse rate, respiratory rate, and %SpO₂) and clinical observations were monitored during the study and for 3 days post drug administration. D2 provided the longest sedation (approximately 70 min), compared to D1 and D1.5. After Ta, each elephant’s sedative stage lessened within 10–15 min without complications. No significant abnormal clinical observations were noted throughout and during the 3-days post study period. These data suggest that a single 2 µg/kg IM dexmedetomidine injection provides sufficient standing sedation for approximately 70 min in Asian elephants.

Enantiospecific pharmacokinetics of intravenous dexmedetomidine in beagles

The goal of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic (PK) behaviour of dexmedetomidine in dogs administered as a pure enantiomer versus as part of a racemic mixture. Eight unmedicated intact purpose‐bread beagles were included. Two intravenous treatments of either medetomidine or dexmedetomidine were administered at 10‐ to 14‐day intervals. Atipamezole or saline solution was administered intramuscularly 45 min later. Venous blood samples were collected into EDTA collection tubes, and the quantification of dexmedetomidine and levomedetomidine was performed by chiral LC–MS/MS. All dogs appeared sedated after each treatment without complication. Plasma concentrations of levomedetomidine were measured only in the racemic group and were 51.4% (51.4%–56.1%) lower than dexmedetomidine. Non‐compartmental analysis (NCA) was performed for both drugs, while dexmedetomidine data were further described using a population pharmacokinetic approach. A standard two‐compartment mammillary model with linear elimination with combined additive and multiplicative error model for residual unexplained variability was established for dexmedetomidine. An exponential model was finally retained to describe inter‐individual variability on parameters of clearance (Cl₁) and central and peripheral volumes of distribution (V₁, V₂). No effect of occurrence, levomedetomidine or atipamezole could be observed on dexmedetomidine PK parameters. Dexmedetomidine did not undergo significantly different PK when administered alone or as part of the racemic mixture in otherwise unmedicated dogs.

Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine Premedication in Balanced Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Dogs

Simple Summary

Dexmedetomidine, on account of its potent sedative and analgesic properties, is commonly used in balanced anesthesia of small animal anesthesia; however, concerns regarding its cardiovascular effects prevent its full adoption into veterinary clinical practice. We conducted this meta-analysis to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine on sedation, analgesia, cardiovascular and adverse reactions in dogs compared to other premedications. The outcomes included sedation score, pain score, heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, mean arterial blood pressure and the incidence of adverse effects. Thirteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that dexmedetomidine provides a satisfactory sedative and analgesic effect in balanced anesthesia of dogs. After dexmedetomidine premedication, dogs experienced lower heart rate and higher blood pressure within an acceptable range. The combinations in balanced anesthesia and routes of delivering drugs would affect heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, and mean arterial blood pressure of dogs. Before using dexmedetomidine, an animal’s cardiovascular status should be fully considered.

Abstract

Dexmedetomidine is commonly used in small animal anesthesia for its potent sedative and analgesic properties; however, concerns regarding its cardiovascular effects prevent its full adoption into veterinary clinical practice. This meta-analysis was to determine the effects of dexmedetomidine on sedation, analgesia, cardiovascular and adverse reactions in dogs compared to other premedications. Following the study protocol based on the Cochrane Review Methods, thirteen studies were included in this meta-analysis ultimately, involving a total of 576 dogs. Dexmedetomidine administration probably improved in sedation and analgesia in comparison to acepromazine, ketamine and lidocaine (MD: 1.96, 95% CI: [−0.08, 4.00], p = 0.06; MD: −0.95, 95% CI: [−1.52, −0.37] p = 0.001; respectively). Hemodynamic outcomes showed that dogs probably experienced lower heart rate and higher systolic arterial blood pressure and mean arterial blood pressure with dexmedetomidine at 30 min after premedication (MD: −13.25, 95% CI: [−19.67, −6.81], p < 0.0001; MD: 7.78, 95% CI: [1.83, 13.74], p = 0.01; MD: 8.32, 95% CI: [3.95, 12.70], p = 0.0002; respectively). The incidence of adverse effects was comparable between dexmedetomidine and other premedications (RR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.58, 1.29], p = 0.47). In summary, dexmedetomidine provides satisfactory sedative and analgesic effects, and its safety is proved despite its significant hemodynamic effects as part of balanced anesthesia of dogs.