比较用于诱导雌性豚鼠(Cavia porcellus)手术麻醉的三种麻醉药物组合。

Janelle A Avelino, Courtney A Walsh, Keely Nicole Wharton, Dinesh Ekanayake, Dil Ekanayake-Alper
{"title":"比较用于诱导雌性豚鼠(Cavia porcellus)手术麻醉的三种麻醉药物组合。","authors":"Janelle A Avelino, Courtney A Walsh, Keely Nicole Wharton, Dinesh Ekanayake, Dil Ekanayake-Alper","doi":"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-23-000064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Guinea pigs are often used in translational research, but providing them with safe and effective anesthesia is a challenge. Common methods like inhalant anesthesia and injectable ketamine/xylazine induce surgical anesthesia but can negatively affect cardiovascular, respiratory, and thermoregulatory systems and complicate the interpretation of research outcomes. Several alternative anesthetic regimens have been investigated, but none have consistently achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia. Therefore, identifying an anesthetic regimen that achieves a stable state of the surgical plane of anesthesia while preserving cardiorespiratory function would be a valuable contribution. To address this issue, we compared the efficacy of 3 anesthetic combinations in female Dunkin-Hartley guinea pigs: 1) alfaxalone, dexmedetomidine, and fentanyl (ADF); 2) alfaxalone, midazolam, and fentanyl (AMF); and 3) alfaxalone, midazolam, fentanyl, and isoflurane (AMFIso). We monitored anesthetic depth, heart rate, oxygenation, respiratory rate, respiratory effort, blood pressure, and body temperature every 15 min from injection to recovery. We also recorded the time to loss of righting reflex, duration of anesthesia, and time to achieve a surgical plane. The results showed no statistically significant differences in induction and recovery times among the groups. In the AMFIso group, 100% of the animals achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia, whereas only 10% of the animals in the AMF group reached that level. None of the animals in ADF group reached a surgical plane of anesthesia. Respiratory rate was significantly lower in the AMFIso as compared with the ADF group (<i>P</i> < 0.001) but was not different between the AMF and ADF groups. Temperature was significantly lower in the AMFIso group as compared with both the ADF and AMF groups (<i>P</i> < 0.001). In conclusion, both combinations of solely injectable anesthetics assessed in this study can be used for short, nonpainful procedures without significant cardiorespiratory depression. However, for mildly to moderately painful surgical procedures, the addition of an inhalant anesthetic like isoflurane is necessary for female guinea pigs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","volume":" ","pages":"182-189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11022950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Three Anesthetic Drug Combinations for Use in Inducing Surgical Anesthesia in Female Guinea Pigs (<i>Cavia porcellus</i>).\",\"authors\":\"Janelle A Avelino, Courtney A Walsh, Keely Nicole Wharton, Dinesh Ekanayake, Dil Ekanayake-Alper\",\"doi\":\"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-23-000064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Guinea pigs are often used in translational research, but providing them with safe and effective anesthesia is a challenge. Common methods like inhalant anesthesia and injectable ketamine/xylazine induce surgical anesthesia but can negatively affect cardiovascular, respiratory, and thermoregulatory systems and complicate the interpretation of research outcomes. Several alternative anesthetic regimens have been investigated, but none have consistently achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia. Therefore, identifying an anesthetic regimen that achieves a stable state of the surgical plane of anesthesia while preserving cardiorespiratory function would be a valuable contribution. To address this issue, we compared the efficacy of 3 anesthetic combinations in female Dunkin-Hartley guinea pigs: 1) alfaxalone, dexmedetomidine, and fentanyl (ADF); 2) alfaxalone, midazolam, and fentanyl (AMF); and 3) alfaxalone, midazolam, fentanyl, and isoflurane (AMFIso). We monitored anesthetic depth, heart rate, oxygenation, respiratory rate, respiratory effort, blood pressure, and body temperature every 15 min from injection to recovery. We also recorded the time to loss of righting reflex, duration of anesthesia, and time to achieve a surgical plane. The results showed no statistically significant differences in induction and recovery times among the groups. In the AMFIso group, 100% of the animals achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia, whereas only 10% of the animals in the AMF group reached that level. None of the animals in ADF group reached a surgical plane of anesthesia. Respiratory rate was significantly lower in the AMFIso as compared with the ADF group (<i>P</i> < 0.001) but was not different between the AMF and ADF groups. Temperature was significantly lower in the AMFIso group as compared with both the ADF and AMF groups (<i>P</i> < 0.001). In conclusion, both combinations of solely injectable anesthetics assessed in this study can be used for short, nonpainful procedures without significant cardiorespiratory depression. However, for mildly to moderately painful surgical procedures, the addition of an inhalant anesthetic like isoflurane is necessary for female guinea pigs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"182-189\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11022950/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-23-000064\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-23-000064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

豚鼠经常被用于转化研究,但为它们提供安全有效的麻醉是一项挑战。吸入麻醉和注射氯胺酮/恶嗪等常用方法可诱导手术麻醉,但会对心血管、呼吸和体温调节系统产生负面影响,并使研究结果的解释复杂化。目前已对几种替代麻醉方案进行了研究,但没有一种方案能持续达到手术麻醉的效果。因此,确定一种既能实现稳定的手术麻醉平面状态,又能保护心肺功能的麻醉方案将是一项有价值的贡献。为了解决这个问题,我们比较了 3 种麻醉组合在雌性 Dunkin-Hartley 豚鼠身上的疗效:1)阿法沙隆、右美托咪定和芬太尼(ADF);2)阿法沙隆、咪达唑仑和芬太尼(AMF);3)阿法沙隆、咪达唑仑、芬太尼和异氟醚(AMFIso)。从注射到恢复,我们每 15 分钟监测一次麻醉深度、心率、血氧饱和度、呼吸频率、呼吸强度、血压和体温。我们还记录了右反射消失的时间、麻醉持续时间和达到手术平面的时间。结果显示,各组在诱导和恢复时间上没有明显的统计学差异。在AMFIso组中,100%的动物达到了手术麻醉平面,而在AMF组中只有10%的动物达到了这一水平。ADF组没有一只动物达到手术麻醉平面。AMFIso组的呼吸频率明显低于ADF组(P < 0.001),但AMF组与ADF组之间没有差异。与 ADF 组和 AMF 组相比,AMFIso 组的体温明显降低(P < 0.001)。总之,本研究中评估的两种纯注射麻醉剂组合均可用于短时间、无痛苦的手术,不会对心肺功能造成明显抑制。不过,对于轻度至中度疼痛的手术过程,雌性豚鼠有必要添加异氟醚等吸入性麻醉剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison of Three Anesthetic Drug Combinations for Use in Inducing Surgical Anesthesia in Female Guinea Pigs (Cavia porcellus).

Guinea pigs are often used in translational research, but providing them with safe and effective anesthesia is a challenge. Common methods like inhalant anesthesia and injectable ketamine/xylazine induce surgical anesthesia but can negatively affect cardiovascular, respiratory, and thermoregulatory systems and complicate the interpretation of research outcomes. Several alternative anesthetic regimens have been investigated, but none have consistently achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia. Therefore, identifying an anesthetic regimen that achieves a stable state of the surgical plane of anesthesia while preserving cardiorespiratory function would be a valuable contribution. To address this issue, we compared the efficacy of 3 anesthetic combinations in female Dunkin-Hartley guinea pigs: 1) alfaxalone, dexmedetomidine, and fentanyl (ADF); 2) alfaxalone, midazolam, and fentanyl (AMF); and 3) alfaxalone, midazolam, fentanyl, and isoflurane (AMFIso). We monitored anesthetic depth, heart rate, oxygenation, respiratory rate, respiratory effort, blood pressure, and body temperature every 15 min from injection to recovery. We also recorded the time to loss of righting reflex, duration of anesthesia, and time to achieve a surgical plane. The results showed no statistically significant differences in induction and recovery times among the groups. In the AMFIso group, 100% of the animals achieved a surgical plane of anesthesia, whereas only 10% of the animals in the AMF group reached that level. None of the animals in ADF group reached a surgical plane of anesthesia. Respiratory rate was significantly lower in the AMFIso as compared with the ADF group (P < 0.001) but was not different between the AMF and ADF groups. Temperature was significantly lower in the AMFIso group as compared with both the ADF and AMF groups (P < 0.001). In conclusion, both combinations of solely injectable anesthetics assessed in this study can be used for short, nonpainful procedures without significant cardiorespiratory depression. However, for mildly to moderately painful surgical procedures, the addition of an inhalant anesthetic like isoflurane is necessary for female guinea pigs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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