Propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction in healthy dogs: effects on propofol dosages, cardiovascular and respiratory events

J. Coward, Mathieu Raillard
{"title":"Propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction in healthy dogs: effects on propofol dosages, cardiovascular and respiratory events","authors":"J. Coward, Mathieu Raillard","doi":"10.18849/ve.v7i2.450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \nIn healthy dogs, does the use of diazepam or midazolam administered in co-induction with propofol result in a reduction in the dose of propofol required to induce anaesthesia and a decrease in adverse cardiovascular and respiratory events? \n  \nClinical bottom line \nCategory of research question \nTreatment \nThe number and type of study designs reviewed \nEight papers were critically reviewed. A total of six manuscripts were prospective, randomised, blinded, clinical studies. One trial was prospective, randomised, blinded, clinical with a Latin square, incomplete design. One study was retrospective, randomised, blinded, crossover, experimental \nStrength of evidence \nModerate \nOutcomes reported \nVariables assessed in this Knowledge Summary included: propofol dose required to induce anaesthesia (considering successful orotracheal intubation as an end point), changes in cardiovascular variables (heart rate, systolic, mean and diastolic blood pressure) and changes in respiratory variables (development of apnoea, changes in respiratory rates) \nConclusion \nIn healthy dogs, using propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction resulted in a reduction in propofol dose required to induce anaesthesia in some trials only. Midazolam appeared more effective than diazepam in this context. The dosages, timing and sequence of drug administration seemed relevant. No evidence suggested that using propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction resulted in a reduction of adverse cardiovascular or respiratory events. In addition, although this was out of the scope of the PICO question addressed here, adverse events (e.g. excitement, poorer quality of induction) were reported in several studies when diazepam or midazolam were used in co-induction \n  \nHow to apply this evidence in practice \nThe application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \nKnowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \n  \n","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v7i2.450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PICO question In healthy dogs, does the use of diazepam or midazolam administered in co-induction with propofol result in a reduction in the dose of propofol required to induce anaesthesia and a decrease in adverse cardiovascular and respiratory events?   Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Eight papers were critically reviewed. A total of six manuscripts were prospective, randomised, blinded, clinical studies. One trial was prospective, randomised, blinded, clinical with a Latin square, incomplete design. One study was retrospective, randomised, blinded, crossover, experimental Strength of evidence Moderate Outcomes reported Variables assessed in this Knowledge Summary included: propofol dose required to induce anaesthesia (considering successful orotracheal intubation as an end point), changes in cardiovascular variables (heart rate, systolic, mean and diastolic blood pressure) and changes in respiratory variables (development of apnoea, changes in respiratory rates) Conclusion In healthy dogs, using propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction resulted in a reduction in propofol dose required to induce anaesthesia in some trials only. Midazolam appeared more effective than diazepam in this context. The dosages, timing and sequence of drug administration seemed relevant. No evidence suggested that using propofol-diazepam or propofol-midazolam co-induction resulted in a reduction of adverse cardiovascular or respiratory events. In addition, although this was out of the scope of the PICO question addressed here, adverse events (e.g. excitement, poorer quality of induction) were reported in several studies when diazepam or midazolam were used in co-induction   How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.  
异丙酚-地西泮或异丙酚-咪达唑仑在健康犬中的共诱导作用:对异丙酚剂量、心血管和呼吸事件的影响
PICO问题:在健康犬中,使用地西泮或咪达唑仑与异丙酚共诱导是否会导致诱导麻醉所需异丙酚剂量的减少以及不良心血管和呼吸事件的减少?临床底线研究问题类别治疗研究设计的数量和类型审查了8篇论文。共有6篇论文是前瞻性、随机、盲法临床研究。一项试验是前瞻性、随机、盲法、临床、拉丁方、不完全设计。一项研究为回顾性、随机、盲法、交叉、实验研究证据强度中等结果报告本知识摘要评估的变量包括:异丙酚诱导麻醉所需剂量(以气管插管成功为终点)、心血管变量(心率、收缩压、平均压和舒张压)和呼吸变量(呼吸暂停的发生、呼吸速率的变化)的变化结论在健康犬中,异丙酚-地西泮或异丙酚-咪达唑仑共诱导仅在一些试验中导致诱导麻醉所需异丙酚剂量的减少。在这种情况下,咪达唑仑似乎比地西泮更有效。给药的剂量、时间和顺序似乎是相关的。没有证据表明使用异丙酚-地西泮或异丙酚-咪达唑仑共诱导导致不良心血管或呼吸事件的减少。此外,尽管这超出了本文讨论的PICO问题的范围,但在一些研究中,当使用地西泮或咪达唑仑进行共诱导时,报告了不良事件(例如兴奋,诱导质量较差)。如何在实践中应用这一证据?个人的临床专业知识,病人的情况和业主的价值观,你工作的国家,地点或诊所,你面前的个案,治疗和资源的可用性。知识摘要是帮助加强或告知决策的资源。他们不会凌驾于从业者的责任或判断之上,去做对他们照顾的动物最好的事情。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信