乙酰丙嗪-丁丙诺啡预先给药犬阿法索酮与异丙酚的心肺和麻醉效果比较

Q3 Veterinary
S. O. Adediran, A. Adetunji
{"title":"乙酰丙嗪-丁丙诺啡预先给药犬阿法索酮与异丙酚的心肺和麻醉效果比较","authors":"S. O. Adediran, A. Adetunji","doi":"10.15547/bjvm.2410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study compared the cardiorespiratory and anaesthetic effects of alfaxalone or propofol for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine. Six adult Nigerian dogs with mean±S.D. body weight of 11.5±1.6 kg were studied. Acepromazine hydrochloride (0.03 mg/kg) and buprenorphine (0.02 mg/kg) were mixed in the same syringe and administered intramuscularly as premedicants. Following obvious sedation, anaesthesia was induced with bolus intravenous (IV) injection of either 2.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 4.0 mg/kg propofol over a period of about 30 s. Repeated IV bolus injection of either 1.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 2.0 mg/kg propofol was administered at 10 minute interval for maintenance of anaesthesia over 90 minutes. Physiological variables were measured and recorded at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes using a multi-parameter monitor. Onset and duration of analgesia with alfaxalone protocol (2.2±0.4 min and 106.2±4.0 min) were significantly (P<0.05) shorter than those with propofol protocol (4.5±1.4 min and 124.5±3.4 min) respectively. Duration of recumbency with alfaxalone (159.5±18.9 min) and propofol (150.8±5.7 min) were not significantly different. Time to standing and recovery time with alfaxalone (38.2±10.8 min and 76.8±28.4 min) were significantly (P<0.05) longer than those with propofol (14.0±3.8 min and 23.5±6.4 min respectively). There were no significant differences between mean heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2) and rectal temperature (RT) between both protocols. In conclusion, either alfaxalone or propofol appeared to be equally efficacious and safe for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in healthy dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine.","PeriodicalId":9279,"journal":{"name":"BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of cardiorespiratory and anaesthetic effect of alfaxalone or propofol in dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine\",\"authors\":\"S. O. Adediran, A. Adetunji\",\"doi\":\"10.15547/bjvm.2410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study compared the cardiorespiratory and anaesthetic effects of alfaxalone or propofol for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine. Six adult Nigerian dogs with mean±S.D. body weight of 11.5±1.6 kg were studied. Acepromazine hydrochloride (0.03 mg/kg) and buprenorphine (0.02 mg/kg) were mixed in the same syringe and administered intramuscularly as premedicants. Following obvious sedation, anaesthesia was induced with bolus intravenous (IV) injection of either 2.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 4.0 mg/kg propofol over a period of about 30 s. Repeated IV bolus injection of either 1.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 2.0 mg/kg propofol was administered at 10 minute interval for maintenance of anaesthesia over 90 minutes. Physiological variables were measured and recorded at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes using a multi-parameter monitor. Onset and duration of analgesia with alfaxalone protocol (2.2±0.4 min and 106.2±4.0 min) were significantly (P<0.05) shorter than those with propofol protocol (4.5±1.4 min and 124.5±3.4 min) respectively. Duration of recumbency with alfaxalone (159.5±18.9 min) and propofol (150.8±5.7 min) were not significantly different. Time to standing and recovery time with alfaxalone (38.2±10.8 min and 76.8±28.4 min) were significantly (P<0.05) longer than those with propofol (14.0±3.8 min and 23.5±6.4 min respectively). There were no significant differences between mean heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2) and rectal temperature (RT) between both protocols. In conclusion, either alfaxalone or propofol appeared to be equally efficacious and safe for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in healthy dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15547/bjvm.2410\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Veterinary\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15547/bjvm.2410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Veterinary","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究比较了在全静脉麻醉(TIVA)中预先给药乙酰丙嗪-丁丙诺啡犬的阿法索酮或异丙酚的心肺和麻醉效果。6只成年尼日利亚犬,平均±sd体重为11.5±1.6 kg。将盐酸乙酰丙嗪(0.03 mg/kg)与丁丙诺啡(0.02 mg/kg)混合在同一注射器中,作为前药肌注。明显镇静后,静脉注射2.0 mg/kg阿法沙龙或4.0 mg/kg异丙酚,麻醉时间约30 s。每隔10分钟反复静脉注射1.0 mg/kg阿法索龙或2.0 mg/kg异丙酚,维持麻醉90分钟以上。使用多参数监测器在90分钟内每隔15分钟测量和记录生理变量。alfaxone组镇痛起效时间(2.2±0.4 min)和持续时间(106.2±4.0 min)明显短于异丙酚组(4.5±1.4 min和124.5±3.4 min) (P<0.05)。丙泊酚(150.8±5.7 min)与alfaxone(159.5±18.9 min)的卧位时间无显著差异。alfaxone组站立时间(38.2±10.8 min)和恢复时间(76.8±28.4 min)明显长于异丙酚组(14.0±3.8 min和23.5±6.4 min) (P<0.05)。两种治疗方案的平均心率(HR)、平均动脉压(MAP)、呼吸频率(RR)、血红蛋白氧饱和度(SpO2)和直肠温度(RT)无显著差异。综上所述,对于预先使用乙酰丙嗪-丁丙诺啡的健康犬,无论是甲氧嘧啶还是异丙酚,诱导和维持麻醉似乎都是同样有效和安全的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of cardiorespiratory and anaesthetic effect of alfaxalone or propofol in dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine
The study compared the cardiorespiratory and anaesthetic effects of alfaxalone or propofol for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine. Six adult Nigerian dogs with mean±S.D. body weight of 11.5±1.6 kg were studied. Acepromazine hydrochloride (0.03 mg/kg) and buprenorphine (0.02 mg/kg) were mixed in the same syringe and administered intramuscularly as premedicants. Following obvious sedation, anaesthesia was induced with bolus intravenous (IV) injection of either 2.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 4.0 mg/kg propofol over a period of about 30 s. Repeated IV bolus injection of either 1.0 mg/kg alfaxalone or 2.0 mg/kg propofol was administered at 10 minute interval for maintenance of anaesthesia over 90 minutes. Physiological variables were measured and recorded at 15 minute intervals over 90 minutes using a multi-parameter monitor. Onset and duration of analgesia with alfaxalone protocol (2.2±0.4 min and 106.2±4.0 min) were significantly (P<0.05) shorter than those with propofol protocol (4.5±1.4 min and 124.5±3.4 min) respectively. Duration of recumbency with alfaxalone (159.5±18.9 min) and propofol (150.8±5.7 min) were not significantly different. Time to standing and recovery time with alfaxalone (38.2±10.8 min and 76.8±28.4 min) were significantly (P<0.05) longer than those with propofol (14.0±3.8 min and 23.5±6.4 min respectively). There were no significant differences between mean heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), respiratory rate (RR), haemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2) and rectal temperature (RT) between both protocols. In conclusion, either alfaxalone or propofol appeared to be equally efficacious and safe for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in healthy dogs premedicated with acepromazine-buprenorphine.
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
BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE
BULGARIAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE Veterinary-Veterinary (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: BJVM is a no-fee open-access scientific quarterly journal which covers topics related to both fundamental and applied aspects of veterinary medicine and to closely connected subjects with it. The journal publishes original papers, short communications and reviews.
×
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