Effects of anesthetic protocol, procedure, and recovery stall and interval on the quality of recovery in repeatedly anesthetized horses.

IF 0.8 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Anna R P Henderson, Alexander Valverde, Judith Koenig, William Sears
{"title":"Effects of anesthetic protocol, procedure, and recovery stall and interval on the quality of recovery in repeatedly anesthetized horses.","authors":"Anna R P Henderson, Alexander Valverde, Judith Koenig, William Sears","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this prospective study was to investigate whether repeated consecutive general anesthesia in horses undergoing 2 different anesthetic protocols could lead to improved recovery scores. Six healthy female Standardbred horses (453 ± 57 kg; 6.5 ± 4.2 y old) underwent 4 anesthetic protocols over 12 to 13 wk. Procedures 1 and 4 were arthroscopic surgeries [induction: xylazine, diazepam, and ketamine; and maintenance: Fe'Isoflurane (1.1%), lidocaine (2 mg/kg body weight [BW], 50 to 100 μg/min per kg BW), dexmedetomidine (2.5 μg/h per kg BW)]. Procedures 2 and 3 were preparation for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [induction: xylazine, guaifenesin, and ketamine; and maintenance: Fe'Isoflurane (1.3%)], as well as mechanical ventilation during all events. For recovery, horses were placed in 2 different recovery stalls, one for procedures 1 and 4, and a different one for procedures 2 and 3, and received xylazine, 0.15 to 0.25 mg/kg BW, IV. Recovery was scored using a numerical score and descriptive scale. A 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare recovery scores, cardiopulmonary variables, anesthetic times, and drug dosages between procedures (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Anesthetic protocols for procedures 3 (10.5 ± 2.5) and 4 (10.2 ± 3.1) had better (<i>P</i> = 0.0348) recovery numerical scores than those for procedure 2 (14.3 ± 1.9) and were similar to those for procedure 1 (11.5 ± 2.3), but overall descriptive scores were not significantly different (1 = 1.7 ± 0.5, 2 = 1.8 ± 0.4, 3 = 1.3 ± 0.5, 4 = 1.3 ± 0.5). Balance and coordination (<i>P</i> = 0.0172) and knuckling (<i>P</i> = 0.0193) were associated with worse recovery in procedure 2. Anesthesia time was longer (<i>P</i> < 0.0001) in procedures 2 (157 ± 11 min) and 3 (96 ± 5 min) than in procedures 1 (72 ± 9 min) and 4 (60 ± 5 min). In conclusion, the quality of recovery is influenced by anesthetic protocol and in this study, quality improved in procedures 3 and 4 compared to procedure 2.</p>","PeriodicalId":93919,"journal":{"name":"Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire","volume":"89 1","pages":"17-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11665727/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this prospective study was to investigate whether repeated consecutive general anesthesia in horses undergoing 2 different anesthetic protocols could lead to improved recovery scores. Six healthy female Standardbred horses (453 ± 57 kg; 6.5 ± 4.2 y old) underwent 4 anesthetic protocols over 12 to 13 wk. Procedures 1 and 4 were arthroscopic surgeries [induction: xylazine, diazepam, and ketamine; and maintenance: Fe'Isoflurane (1.1%), lidocaine (2 mg/kg body weight [BW], 50 to 100 μg/min per kg BW), dexmedetomidine (2.5 μg/h per kg BW)]. Procedures 2 and 3 were preparation for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [induction: xylazine, guaifenesin, and ketamine; and maintenance: Fe'Isoflurane (1.3%)], as well as mechanical ventilation during all events. For recovery, horses were placed in 2 different recovery stalls, one for procedures 1 and 4, and a different one for procedures 2 and 3, and received xylazine, 0.15 to 0.25 mg/kg BW, IV. Recovery was scored using a numerical score and descriptive scale. A 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare recovery scores, cardiopulmonary variables, anesthetic times, and drug dosages between procedures (P < 0.05). Anesthetic protocols for procedures 3 (10.5 ± 2.5) and 4 (10.2 ± 3.1) had better (P = 0.0348) recovery numerical scores than those for procedure 2 (14.3 ± 1.9) and were similar to those for procedure 1 (11.5 ± 2.3), but overall descriptive scores were not significantly different (1 = 1.7 ± 0.5, 2 = 1.8 ± 0.4, 3 = 1.3 ± 0.5, 4 = 1.3 ± 0.5). Balance and coordination (P = 0.0172) and knuckling (P = 0.0193) were associated with worse recovery in procedure 2. Anesthesia time was longer (P < 0.0001) in procedures 2 (157 ± 11 min) and 3 (96 ± 5 min) than in procedures 1 (72 ± 9 min) and 4 (60 ± 5 min). In conclusion, the quality of recovery is influenced by anesthetic protocol and in this study, quality improved in procedures 3 and 4 compared to procedure 2.

麻醉方案、程序、恢复失速和间隔对反复麻醉马恢复质量的影响。
这项前瞻性研究的目的是调查在接受两种不同麻醉方案的马中重复连续全身麻醉是否可以提高恢复评分。6匹健康母标准马(453±57公斤);(6.5±4.2岁)在12 ~ 13周内进行了4次麻醉。程序1和4为关节镜手术[诱导:二甲肼、安定和氯胺酮;维持:异氟醚(1.1%)、利多卡因(2 mg/kg体重[BW], 50 ~ 100 μg/min /kg BW)、右美托咪定(2.5 μg/h /kg BW)。程序2和程序3为磁共振成像(MRI)准备[诱导:噻嗪、愈创甘油醚、氯胺酮;维持:Fe'异氟醚(1.3%)],并在所有事件期间进行机械通气。为了恢复,马被放置在2个不同的恢复马厩中,一个用于步骤1和4,另一个用于步骤2和3,并接受羟嗪,0.15至0.25 mg/kg BW, IV。恢复使用数值评分和描述性量表进行评分。采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)比较手术间恢复评分、心肺变量、麻醉时间和药物剂量(P < 0.05)。麻醉方案3(10.5±2.5)和麻醉方案4(10.2±3.1)的恢复数值评分优于麻醉方案2(14.3±1.9)(P = 0.0348),与麻醉方案1(11.5±2.3)相似,但总体描述性评分差异无统计学意义(1 = 1.7±0.5,2 = 1.8±0.4,3 = 1.3±0.5,4 = 1.3±0.5)。在步骤2中,平衡和协调(P = 0.0172)和指关节(P = 0.0193)与较差的恢复有关。麻醉时间2(157±11 min)和3(96±5 min)比1(72±9 min)和4(60±5 min)长(P < 0.0001)。总之,恢复质量受麻醉方案的影响,在本研究中,与程序2相比,程序3和程序4的质量有所提高。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信