Comparison of bupivacaine liposome injectable solution and fentanyl for postoperative analgesia in dogs undergoing limb amputation.

IF 1.3 2区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Veterinary Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1111/vsu.14080
Snighdha Paul, Alena Strelchik, Jack O'Day, Alonso G P Guedes, Wanda J Gordon-Evans
{"title":"Comparison of bupivacaine liposome injectable solution and fentanyl for postoperative analgesia in dogs undergoing limb amputation.","authors":"Snighdha Paul, Alena Strelchik, Jack O'Day, Alonso G P Guedes, Wanda J Gordon-Evans","doi":"10.1111/vsu.14080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objectives of the study were to compare the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of two analgesic protocols consisting of bupivacaine liposome injectable solution (BLIS) and 0.5% bupivacaine and fentanyl for postsurgical analgesia in dogs undergoing limb amputation.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Randomized, double-blind, prospective, controlled, intent-to-treat, clinical noninferiority trial.</p><p><strong>Animals: </strong>Forty client-owned dogs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dogs undergoing amputation were randomly assigned to either the BLIS or control group. Postoperative pain, sedation, nausea, and amount eaten were assessed using appropriate scales at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h by trained individuals blinded to the treatment protocol. Rescue analgesia was provided for Glasgow composite measure pain scale (short form) (CMPS-SF) scores of 5 or above. Clients were requested to pain score their dogs at home using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for 48 h following discharge.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty dogs completed this study (20 control dogs and 20 BLIS dogs). The BLIS and control groups were equivalent for sedation, nausea, amount eaten, and pain, at all time periods except at 6 h (p < .01), when the BLIS group pain score was lower.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BLIS provided equivalent analgesia with fewer adverse effects than fentanyl constant rate infusion (CRI) following limb amputation. Rescue analgesia was provided to five dogs in the BLIS group and four in the control group, and there was no statistical difference. Nausea scores did not differ statistically.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>As BLIS provides equivalent analgesia, this may allow for decreased reliance on opioids in the immediate postoperative period.</p>","PeriodicalId":23667,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1102-1110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14080","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objectives of the study were to compare the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of two analgesic protocols consisting of bupivacaine liposome injectable solution (BLIS) and 0.5% bupivacaine and fentanyl for postsurgical analgesia in dogs undergoing limb amputation.

Study design: Randomized, double-blind, prospective, controlled, intent-to-treat, clinical noninferiority trial.

Animals: Forty client-owned dogs.

Methods: Dogs undergoing amputation were randomly assigned to either the BLIS or control group. Postoperative pain, sedation, nausea, and amount eaten were assessed using appropriate scales at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h by trained individuals blinded to the treatment protocol. Rescue analgesia was provided for Glasgow composite measure pain scale (short form) (CMPS-SF) scores of 5 or above. Clients were requested to pain score their dogs at home using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for 48 h following discharge.

Results: Forty dogs completed this study (20 control dogs and 20 BLIS dogs). The BLIS and control groups were equivalent for sedation, nausea, amount eaten, and pain, at all time periods except at 6 h (p < .01), when the BLIS group pain score was lower.

Conclusion: The BLIS provided equivalent analgesia with fewer adverse effects than fentanyl constant rate infusion (CRI) following limb amputation. Rescue analgesia was provided to five dogs in the BLIS group and four in the control group, and there was no statistical difference. Nausea scores did not differ statistically.

Clinical significance: As BLIS provides equivalent analgesia, this may allow for decreased reliance on opioids in the immediate postoperative period.

比较布比卡因脂质体注射液和芬太尼对截肢犬的术后镇痛效果。
研究目的研究目的:比较布比卡因脂质体注射液(BLIS)和0.5%布比卡因加芬太尼两种镇痛方案对截肢犬术后镇痛的临床疗效和不良反应:随机、双盲、前瞻性、对照、意向治疗、临床非劣效性试验:40只客户饲养的狗:接受截肢手术的狗被随机分配到 BLIS 组或对照组。术后疼痛、镇静、恶心和进食量分别在 6、12、18 和 24 小时由受过培训的治疗方案盲人使用适当的量表进行评估。如果格拉斯哥综合疼痛量表(简表)(CMPS-SF)评分达到或超过 5 分,则提供镇痛救援。要求客户在出院后的 48 小时内使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对家中的狗进行疼痛评分:40 只狗完成了这项研究(20 只对照组狗和 20 只 BLIS 组狗)。除 6 小时外,BLIS 组和对照组在镇静、恶心、进食量和疼痛方面的表现在所有时间段都相当(p 结论:BLIS 和对照组在镇静、恶心、进食量和疼痛方面的表现都相当:肢体截肢后,BLIS 提供的镇痛效果与芬太尼恒速输注 (CRI) 相当,不良反应较少。BLIS组和对照组分别为5只和4只狗提供了复苏镇痛,两者没有统计学差异。恶心评分没有统计学差异:临床意义:BLIS 可提供同等的镇痛效果,因此可减少术后初期对阿片类药物的依赖。
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
Veterinary Surgery
Veterinary Surgery 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
22.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Surgery, the official publication of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons and European College of Veterinary Surgeons, is a source of up-to-date coverage of surgical and anesthetic management of animals, addressing significant problems in veterinary surgery with relevant case histories and observations. It contains original, peer-reviewed articles that cover developments in veterinary surgery, and presents the most current review of the field, with timely articles on surgical techniques, diagnostic aims, care of infections, and advances in knowledge of metabolism as it affects the surgical patient. The journal places new developments in perspective, encompassing new concepts and peer commentary to help better understand and evaluate the surgical patient.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信