Transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal or bupivacaine hydrochloride with dexmedetomidine provides comparable analgesia to high-dose intravenous buprenorphine in pigs.

IF 1.4 3区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Malwina Basinska, Stephanie A Hon, Emily Pearson, Erica Feldman, Rebecca C McOnie, Stephen Parry, Cristina de Miguel Garcia
{"title":"Transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal or bupivacaine hydrochloride with dexmedetomidine provides comparable analgesia to high-dose intravenous buprenorphine in pigs.","authors":"Malwina Basinska, Stephanie A Hon, Emily Pearson, Erica Feldman, Rebecca C McOnie, Stephen Parry, Cristina de Miguel Garcia","doi":"10.2460/ajvr.25.04.0130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of bilateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks using either liposomal bupivacaine (2.66 mg/kg) expanded with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl; 0.5%; 2 mg/kg) or bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg), each combined with dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg), for abdominal wall desensitization in pigs compared to high-dose IV buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, randomized, blinded study was conducted in 24 pigs assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: (1) saline TAP block and 0.1 mg/kg IV buprenorphine, (2) TAP block with bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg) and dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg), and (3) TAP block with liposomal bupivacaine (2.66 mg/kg) admixed with bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg) and dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg). Transversus abdominis plane blocks were administered at 0.8 mL/kg/hemiabdomen (1.6 mL/kg total/pig). Skin sensitivity was assessed using forceps testing at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after block using a predefined scoring system. The primary outcome was time to resensitization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All TAP blocks were technically successful. Peak desensitization occurred at 6 hours in all groups. No significant differences in the duration or extent of nociceptive blockade were observed between treatments. This study represents the first in vivo assessment of TAP block efficacy in pigs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Liposomal bupivacaine admixed with bupivacaine HCl and dexmedetomidine did not provide prolonged analgesia compared to bupivacaine HCl with dexmedetomidine or high-dose IV buprenorphine.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>TAP blocks may reduce reliance on systemic opioids, supporting opioid-sparing pain management strategies in veterinary medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":7754,"journal":{"name":"American journal of veterinary research","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of veterinary research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.25.04.0130","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of bilateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks using either liposomal bupivacaine (2.66 mg/kg) expanded with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl; 0.5%; 2 mg/kg) or bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg), each combined with dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg), for abdominal wall desensitization in pigs compared to high-dose IV buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg).

Methods: A prospective, randomized, blinded study was conducted in 24 pigs assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: (1) saline TAP block and 0.1 mg/kg IV buprenorphine, (2) TAP block with bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg) and dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg), and (3) TAP block with liposomal bupivacaine (2.66 mg/kg) admixed with bupivacaine HCl (0.5%; 2 mg/kg) and dexmedetomidine (0.4 μg/kg). Transversus abdominis plane blocks were administered at 0.8 mL/kg/hemiabdomen (1.6 mL/kg total/pig). Skin sensitivity was assessed using forceps testing at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours after block using a predefined scoring system. The primary outcome was time to resensitization.

Results: All TAP blocks were technically successful. Peak desensitization occurred at 6 hours in all groups. No significant differences in the duration or extent of nociceptive blockade were observed between treatments. This study represents the first in vivo assessment of TAP block efficacy in pigs.

Conclusions: Liposomal bupivacaine admixed with bupivacaine HCl and dexmedetomidine did not provide prolonged analgesia compared to bupivacaine HCl with dexmedetomidine or high-dose IV buprenorphine.

Clinical relevance: TAP blocks may reduce reliance on systemic opioids, supporting opioid-sparing pain management strategies in veterinary medicine.

脂质体或盐酸布比卡因联合右美托咪定经腹平面阻滞与大剂量静脉注射丁丙诺啡的镇痛效果相当。
目的:评价布比卡因脂质体(2.66 mg/kg)扩展盐酸布比卡因(HCl;0.5%;2mg /kg)或盐酸布比卡因(0.5%;2 mg/kg),分别与右美托咪定(0.4 μg/kg)联合使用,与高剂量IV丁丙诺啡(0.1 mg/kg)相比,对猪的腹壁脱敏效果更好。方法:采用前瞻性、随机、盲法研究,将24头猪分为3个治疗组:(1)生理盐水TAP阻断和0.1 mg/kg IV丁丙诺啡,(2)TAP阻断与盐酸布比卡因(0.5%;2 mg/kg)和右美托咪定(0.4 μg/kg);(3)用布比卡因脂质体(2.66 mg/kg)与盐酸布比卡因(0.5%;2 mg/kg)和右美托咪定(0.4 μg/kg)。经腹平面阻滞剂量为0.8 mL/kg/半腹(总剂量为1.6 mL/kg/猪)。使用预先定义的评分系统,在基线和阻滞后6、12、24、48、72和96小时使用镊子测试皮肤敏感性。主要观察指标为再致敏时间。结果:所有TAP块在技术上均成功。所有组的脱敏高峰均出现在6小时。在两种治疗之间,伤害性阻滞的持续时间和程度没有显著差异。这项研究首次在猪体内评估TAP阻断效果。结论:与盐酸布比卡因与右美托咪定或大剂量IV丁丙诺啡混合相比,布比卡因脂质体与盐酸布比卡因和右美托咪定混合不能提供持久的镇痛效果。临床相关性:TAP阻滞可以减少对全身性阿片类药物的依赖,支持兽药中阿片类药物的疼痛管理策略。
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
186
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Veterinary Research supports the collaborative exchange of information between researchers and clinicians by publishing novel research findings that bridge the gulf between basic research and clinical practice or that help to translate laboratory research and preclinical studies to the development of clinical trials and clinical practice. The journal welcomes submission of high-quality original studies and review articles in a wide range of scientific fields, including anatomy, anesthesiology, animal welfare, behavior, epidemiology, genetics, heredity, infectious disease, molecular biology, oncology, pharmacology, pathogenic mechanisms, physiology, surgery, theriogenology, toxicology, and vaccinology. Species of interest include production animals, companion animals, equids, exotic animals, birds, reptiles, and wild and marine animals. Reports of laboratory animal studies and studies involving the use of animals as experimental models of human diseases are considered only when the study results are of demonstrable benefit to the species used in the research or to another species of veterinary interest. Other fields of interest or animals species are not necessarily excluded from consideration, but such reports must focus on novel research findings. Submitted papers must make an original and substantial contribution to the veterinary medicine knowledge base; preliminary studies are not appropriate.
×
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