João Victor Barbieri Ferronatto, Eduardo Raposo Monteiro, Bárbara Silva Correia, Haiumy Garcia Cardozo, Izadora Loeff Zardo, Fábio Trindade Dutra de Almeida Filho
{"title":"加巴喷丁对预先服用阿司丙嗪和美沙酮的猫的镇静程度、生理变量和异丙酚用量的影响:一项随机、前瞻性、盲法临床研究。","authors":"João Victor Barbieri Ferronatto, Eduardo Raposo Monteiro, Bárbara Silva Correia, Haiumy Garcia Cardozo, Izadora Loeff Zardo, Fábio Trindade Dutra de Almeida Filho","doi":"10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the influence of gabapentin on sedation, propofol dosage, and physiological variables in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone. Thirty-four cats were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral gabapentin (Gabapentin group) or placebo (Control group) 100 min before intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) plus methadone (0.3 mg/kg). Variables recorded included sedation, using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, range 0-100 mm) and a Numeric Descriptive Scale (NDS, range 0-14), heart rate, respiratory rate and Doppler systolic arterial pressure (SAP). All variables were measured before (T0), 100 min after administration of gabapentin or placebo (T1), and 30 min after premedication (T2). Physiological variables were also recorded after anesthetic induction with propofol (T3). At T2, NDS scores were higher in Gabapentin than the Control group [median (interquartile range): 4 (2-5) versus 2 (1-4), p = 0.028], whereas DIVAS scores were not significantly different [Control: 9 (4-13); Gabapentin: 12 (5-32)]. Despite the significant difference between groups in NDS scores, overall sedation scores were mild at T1 and T2 regardless of gabapentin administration. The propofol dosage did not differ between groups. The most concerning adverse effect was arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), recorded only at T3 in 71% of cats in the Control group and 100% in the Gabapentin group, without significant difference between groups. Administration of gabapentin before premedication with acepromazine and methadone in healthy cats did not result in a clinically significant influence on sedation levels, physiological variables, or propofol dosage required for anesthesia induction.</p>","PeriodicalId":23690,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Research Communications","volume":" ","pages":"4179-4183"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of gabapentin on the degree of sedation, physiological variables and propofol dosage in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone: a randomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.\",\"authors\":\"João Victor Barbieri Ferronatto, Eduardo Raposo Monteiro, Bárbara Silva Correia, Haiumy Garcia Cardozo, Izadora Loeff Zardo, Fábio Trindade Dutra de Almeida Filho\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study evaluated the influence of gabapentin on sedation, propofol dosage, and physiological variables in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone. Thirty-four cats were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral gabapentin (Gabapentin group) or placebo (Control group) 100 min before intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) plus methadone (0.3 mg/kg). Variables recorded included sedation, using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, range 0-100 mm) and a Numeric Descriptive Scale (NDS, range 0-14), heart rate, respiratory rate and Doppler systolic arterial pressure (SAP). All variables were measured before (T0), 100 min after administration of gabapentin or placebo (T1), and 30 min after premedication (T2). Physiological variables were also recorded after anesthetic induction with propofol (T3). At T2, NDS scores were higher in Gabapentin than the Control group [median (interquartile range): 4 (2-5) versus 2 (1-4), p = 0.028], whereas DIVAS scores were not significantly different [Control: 9 (4-13); Gabapentin: 12 (5-32)]. Despite the significant difference between groups in NDS scores, overall sedation scores were mild at T1 and T2 regardless of gabapentin administration. The propofol dosage did not differ between groups. The most concerning adverse effect was arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), recorded only at T3 in 71% of cats in the Control group and 100% in the Gabapentin group, without significant difference between groups. Administration of gabapentin before premedication with acepromazine and methadone in healthy cats did not result in a clinically significant influence on sedation levels, physiological variables, or propofol dosage required for anesthesia induction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Research Communications\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4179-4183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Research Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Research Communications","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Influence of gabapentin on the degree of sedation, physiological variables and propofol dosage in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone: a randomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.
This study evaluated the influence of gabapentin on sedation, propofol dosage, and physiological variables in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone. Thirty-four cats were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral gabapentin (Gabapentin group) or placebo (Control group) 100 min before intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) plus methadone (0.3 mg/kg). Variables recorded included sedation, using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, range 0-100 mm) and a Numeric Descriptive Scale (NDS, range 0-14), heart rate, respiratory rate and Doppler systolic arterial pressure (SAP). All variables were measured before (T0), 100 min after administration of gabapentin or placebo (T1), and 30 min after premedication (T2). Physiological variables were also recorded after anesthetic induction with propofol (T3). At T2, NDS scores were higher in Gabapentin than the Control group [median (interquartile range): 4 (2-5) versus 2 (1-4), p = 0.028], whereas DIVAS scores were not significantly different [Control: 9 (4-13); Gabapentin: 12 (5-32)]. Despite the significant difference between groups in NDS scores, overall sedation scores were mild at T1 and T2 regardless of gabapentin administration. The propofol dosage did not differ between groups. The most concerning adverse effect was arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), recorded only at T3 in 71% of cats in the Control group and 100% in the Gabapentin group, without significant difference between groups. Administration of gabapentin before premedication with acepromazine and methadone in healthy cats did not result in a clinically significant influence on sedation levels, physiological variables, or propofol dosage required for anesthesia induction.
期刊介绍:
Veterinary Research Communications publishes fully refereed research articles and topical reviews on all aspects of the veterinary sciences. Interdisciplinary articles are particularly encouraged, as are well argued reviews, even if they are somewhat controversial.
The journal is an appropriate medium in which to publish new methods, newly described diseases and new pathological findings, as these are applied to animals. The material should be of international rather than local interest. As it deliberately seeks a wide coverage, Veterinary Research Communications provides its readers with a means of keeping abreast of current developments in the entire field of veterinary science.