普鲁卡因(含或不含肾上腺素)与利多卡因在小牛热烙术开膛前局部麻醉中的疗效比较。

IF 1.5 4区 农林科学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Magdy Adam, Annemari Jokela, Kati Salla, Riikka Aho, Marja Raekallio, Laura Hänninen, Ann-Helena Hokkanen
{"title":"普鲁卡因(含或不含肾上腺素)与利多卡因在小牛热烙术开膛前局部麻醉中的疗效比较。","authors":"Magdy Adam, Annemari Jokela, Kati Salla, Riikka Aho, Marja Raekallio, Laura Hänninen, Ann-Helena Hokkanen","doi":"10.1111/jvp.13493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Within the European Union, the use of lidocaine in food-producing animals is restricted due to concerns over human safety. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of procaine, with and without epinephrine, against lidocaine in pain alleviation during thermocautery disbudding in xylazine-sedated calves. The efficacy of local blocks was assessed through needle pricks, and the behavioral reactions to disbudding were scored. Post-disbudding pain was subjectively evaluated, and pressure pain threshold and tactile sensitivity around the horn bud were assessed at intervals. Blood was collected at intervals for plasma cortisol analysis. No significant differences were found between the groups in the needle prick test (p = 0.329) and the disbudding score (p = 0.855). Pain scores and quantitative sensory tests showed no significant differences between the lidocaine and procaine-epinephrine groups. Conversely, tactile sensitivity and pain scores were significantly higher, and pressure pain thresholds were significantly lower with procaine alone than in other groups. Elevated cortisol concentrations were observed in all groups before disbudding compared to the baselines. The results suggest that procaine combined with epinephrine appears to be a safe and effective alternative to lidocaine for calf disbudding. Cortisol concentrations as an indicator of pain in xylazine-sedated calves appear inadequate.</p>","PeriodicalId":17596,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Procaine, With and Without Epinephrine, Compared to Lidocaine in Local Anesthesia for Calves Before Thermocautery Disbudding.\",\"authors\":\"Magdy Adam, Annemari Jokela, Kati Salla, Riikka Aho, Marja Raekallio, Laura Hänninen, Ann-Helena Hokkanen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jvp.13493\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Within the European Union, the use of lidocaine in food-producing animals is restricted due to concerns over human safety. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of procaine, with and without epinephrine, against lidocaine in pain alleviation during thermocautery disbudding in xylazine-sedated calves. The efficacy of local blocks was assessed through needle pricks, and the behavioral reactions to disbudding were scored. Post-disbudding pain was subjectively evaluated, and pressure pain threshold and tactile sensitivity around the horn bud were assessed at intervals. Blood was collected at intervals for plasma cortisol analysis. No significant differences were found between the groups in the needle prick test (p = 0.329) and the disbudding score (p = 0.855). Pain scores and quantitative sensory tests showed no significant differences between the lidocaine and procaine-epinephrine groups. Conversely, tactile sensitivity and pain scores were significantly higher, and pressure pain thresholds were significantly lower with procaine alone than in other groups. Elevated cortisol concentrations were observed in all groups before disbudding compared to the baselines. The results suggest that procaine combined with epinephrine appears to be a safe and effective alternative to lidocaine for calf disbudding. Cortisol concentrations as an indicator of pain in xylazine-sedated calves appear inadequate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17596,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jvp.13493\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jvp.13493","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧盟出于对人类安全的考虑,限制在食用动物中使用利多卡因。本研究比较了普鲁卡因(含或不含肾上腺素)与利多卡因在对接受过苯丙胺麻醉的小牛进行热烙术脱肛时减轻疼痛的临床效果。通过针刺评估局部阻滞的效果,并对脱肛时的行为反应进行评分。对开苞后的疼痛进行主观评估,并每隔一段时间评估角芽周围的压痛阈值和触觉敏感性。每隔一段时间采集血液进行血浆皮质醇分析。在针刺试验(p = 0.329)和脱苞评分(p = 0.855)方面,各组之间没有发现明显差异。疼痛评分和定量感觉测试显示,利多卡因组和普鲁卡因-肾上腺素组之间没有明显差异。相反,单用普鲁卡因组的触觉敏感度和疼痛评分明显高于其他组,压痛阈值明显低于其他组。与基线相比,所有组的皮质醇浓度在开苞前都有所升高。结果表明,普鲁卡因联合肾上腺素似乎是一种安全有效的小牛开膛破肚方法,可替代利多卡因。皮质醇浓度作为羟嗪镇痛犊牛的疼痛指标似乎不够充分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy of Procaine, With and Without Epinephrine, Compared to Lidocaine in Local Anesthesia for Calves Before Thermocautery Disbudding.

Within the European Union, the use of lidocaine in food-producing animals is restricted due to concerns over human safety. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of procaine, with and without epinephrine, against lidocaine in pain alleviation during thermocautery disbudding in xylazine-sedated calves. The efficacy of local blocks was assessed through needle pricks, and the behavioral reactions to disbudding were scored. Post-disbudding pain was subjectively evaluated, and pressure pain threshold and tactile sensitivity around the horn bud were assessed at intervals. Blood was collected at intervals for plasma cortisol analysis. No significant differences were found between the groups in the needle prick test (p = 0.329) and the disbudding score (p = 0.855). Pain scores and quantitative sensory tests showed no significant differences between the lidocaine and procaine-epinephrine groups. Conversely, tactile sensitivity and pain scores were significantly higher, and pressure pain thresholds were significantly lower with procaine alone than in other groups. Elevated cortisol concentrations were observed in all groups before disbudding compared to the baselines. The results suggest that procaine combined with epinephrine appears to be a safe and effective alternative to lidocaine for calf disbudding. Cortisol concentrations as an indicator of pain in xylazine-sedated calves appear inadequate.

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
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
15.40%
发文量
69
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics (JVPT) is an international journal devoted to the publication of scientific papers in the basic and clinical aspects of veterinary pharmacology and toxicology, whether the study is in vitro, in vivo, ex vivo or in silico. The Journal is a forum for recent scientific information and developments in the discipline of veterinary pharmacology, including toxicology and therapeutics. Studies that are entirely in vitro will not be considered within the scope of JVPT unless the study has direct relevance to the use of the drug (including toxicants and feed additives) in veterinary species, or that it can be clearly demonstrated that a similar outcome would be expected in vivo. These studies should consider approved or widely used veterinary drugs and/or drugs with broad applicability to veterinary species.
×
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