Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs

To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Prospective, incomplete, Latin-square study. Ten dogs weighing 24.5 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± standard deviation). Dogs were ra...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia 2017-09, Vol.44 (5), p.1016-1026
Hauptverfasser: Liao, PenTing, Sinclair, Melissa, Valverde, Alexander, Mosley, Cornelia, Chalmers, Heather, Mackenzie, Shawn, Hanna, Brad
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1026
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1016
container_title Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia
container_volume 44
creator Liao, PenTing
Sinclair, Melissa
Valverde, Alexander
Mosley, Cornelia
Chalmers, Heather
Mackenzie, Shawn
Hanna, Brad
description To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Prospective, incomplete, Latin-square study. Ten dogs weighing 24.5 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± standard deviation). Dogs were randomly assigned to four treatments: treatment P-M, propofol (1 mg kg−1) and midazolam (0.3 mg kg−1); treatment P-S, propofol and saline; treatment A-M, alfaxalone (0.5 mg kg−1) and midazolam; treatment A-S, alfaxalone and saline, administered intravenously (IV) 10 minutes after fentanyl (7 μg kg−1) IV. Additional propofol or alfaxalone were administered as necessary for endotracheal intubation. TIVA was maintained for 35–55 minutes by infusions of propofol or alfaxalone. Scores were assigned for quality of sedation, induction, extubation and recovery. The drug doses required for intubation and TIVA, times from sedation to end of TIVA, end anesthesia to extubation and to standing were recorded. Analysis included a general linear mixed model with post hoc analysis (p < 0.05). Significant differences were detected in the quality of induction, better in A-M than A-S and P-S, and in P-M than P-S; in total intubation dose, lower in P-M (1.5 mg kg−1) than P-S (2.1 mg kg−1), and A-M (0.62 mg kg−1) than A-S (0.98 mg kg−1); and lower TIVA rate in P-M (268 μg kg−1 minute−1) than P-S (310 μg kg−1 minute−1). TIVA rate was similar in A-M and A-S (83 and 87 μg kg−1 minute−1, respectively). Time to standing was longer after alfaxalone than propofol, but was not influenced by midazolam. Addition of midazolam reduced the induction doses of propofol and alfaxalone and improved the quality of induction in fentanyl-sedated dogs. The dose rate of propofol for TIVA was decreased.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.vaa.2017.02.011
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1945718164</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1467298717301630</els_id><sourcerecordid>1945718164</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-84958f18244edd4ef4a27daf5bb97addd92edbdb0b5b434f80a0f090b4edd6263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUFv1DAQhS0EoqXwA7ggH7lssL1OnIgTqqBUqsQFztY4HlOvnHhrO9su_4P_W2-37JHTWNb3nt7MI-Q9Zw1nvPu0aXYAjWBcNUw0jPMX5JzLTq3EMLQvT-9enZE3OW9YBYeWvSZnoh86JZU6J3-vZ7uMxceZ2piRwmxpwjHuMO3p3QLBlz2Njm5T3EYXwxMAwcEDhDgjvffllsb0NONS6OQt_IkBJjpGf7KuwhDv0VKzpyUWCNTPJcEO57jkaom53GL2UL9rjN_5LXnlIGR89zwvyK9vX39efl_d_Li6vvxysxrX7bqsejm0veO9kBKtlegkCGXBtcYMCqy1g0BrrGGmNXItXc-AOTYwc8A70a0vyMejb13vbqkp9OTziCHUSDWZ5oNsFe95JyvKj-iYYs4Jnd4mP0Haa870oQ290bUNfWhDM6FrG1Xz4dl-MRPak-Lf-Svw-QhgXXLnMek8epxHtL6WULSN_j_2j_3ln9Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1945718164</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Liao, PenTing ; Sinclair, Melissa ; Valverde, Alexander ; Mosley, Cornelia ; Chalmers, Heather ; Mackenzie, Shawn ; Hanna, Brad</creator><creatorcontrib>Liao, PenTing ; Sinclair, Melissa ; Valverde, Alexander ; Mosley, Cornelia ; Chalmers, Heather ; Mackenzie, Shawn ; Hanna, Brad</creatorcontrib><description>To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Prospective, incomplete, Latin-square study. Ten dogs weighing 24.5 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± standard deviation). Dogs were randomly assigned to four treatments: treatment P-M, propofol (1 mg kg−1) and midazolam (0.3 mg kg−1); treatment P-S, propofol and saline; treatment A-M, alfaxalone (0.5 mg kg−1) and midazolam; treatment A-S, alfaxalone and saline, administered intravenously (IV) 10 minutes after fentanyl (7 μg kg−1) IV. Additional propofol or alfaxalone were administered as necessary for endotracheal intubation. TIVA was maintained for 35–55 minutes by infusions of propofol or alfaxalone. Scores were assigned for quality of sedation, induction, extubation and recovery. The drug doses required for intubation and TIVA, times from sedation to end of TIVA, end anesthesia to extubation and to standing were recorded. Analysis included a general linear mixed model with post hoc analysis (p &lt; 0.05). Significant differences were detected in the quality of induction, better in A-M than A-S and P-S, and in P-M than P-S; in total intubation dose, lower in P-M (1.5 mg kg−1) than P-S (2.1 mg kg−1), and A-M (0.62 mg kg−1) than A-S (0.98 mg kg−1); and lower TIVA rate in P-M (268 μg kg−1 minute−1) than P-S (310 μg kg−1 minute−1). TIVA rate was similar in A-M and A-S (83 and 87 μg kg−1 minute−1, respectively). Time to standing was longer after alfaxalone than propofol, but was not influenced by midazolam. Addition of midazolam reduced the induction doses of propofol and alfaxalone and improved the quality of induction in fentanyl-sedated dogs. The dose rate of propofol for TIVA was decreased.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1467-2987</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-2995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.vaa.2017.02.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28967477</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>alfaxalone ; Anesthesia Recovery Period ; Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods ; Anesthesia, Intravenous - veterinary ; Anesthetics, Combined - administration &amp; dosage ; Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage ; Animals ; coinduction ; dog ; Dogs ; Intubation, Intratracheal - veterinary ; midazolam ; Midazolam - administration &amp; dosage ; Pregnanediones - administration &amp; dosage ; propofol ; Propofol - administration &amp; dosage</subject><ispartof>Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia, 2017-09, Vol.44 (5), p.1016-1026</ispartof><rights>2017 Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and American College of Veterinary Anesthesia and Analgesia</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and American College of Veterinary Anesthesia and Analgesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-84958f18244edd4ef4a27daf5bb97addd92edbdb0b5b434f80a0f090b4edd6263</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-84958f18244edd4ef4a27daf5bb97addd92edbdb0b5b434f80a0f090b4edd6263</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28967477$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Liao, PenTing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinclair, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valverde, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosley, Cornelia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chalmers, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackenzie, Shawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanna, Brad</creatorcontrib><title>Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs</title><title>Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia</title><addtitle>Vet Anaesth Analg</addtitle><description>To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Prospective, incomplete, Latin-square study. Ten dogs weighing 24.5 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± standard deviation). Dogs were randomly assigned to four treatments: treatment P-M, propofol (1 mg kg−1) and midazolam (0.3 mg kg−1); treatment P-S, propofol and saline; treatment A-M, alfaxalone (0.5 mg kg−1) and midazolam; treatment A-S, alfaxalone and saline, administered intravenously (IV) 10 minutes after fentanyl (7 μg kg−1) IV. Additional propofol or alfaxalone were administered as necessary for endotracheal intubation. TIVA was maintained for 35–55 minutes by infusions of propofol or alfaxalone. Scores were assigned for quality of sedation, induction, extubation and recovery. The drug doses required for intubation and TIVA, times from sedation to end of TIVA, end anesthesia to extubation and to standing were recorded. Analysis included a general linear mixed model with post hoc analysis (p &lt; 0.05). Significant differences were detected in the quality of induction, better in A-M than A-S and P-S, and in P-M than P-S; in total intubation dose, lower in P-M (1.5 mg kg−1) than P-S (2.1 mg kg−1), and A-M (0.62 mg kg−1) than A-S (0.98 mg kg−1); and lower TIVA rate in P-M (268 μg kg−1 minute−1) than P-S (310 μg kg−1 minute−1). TIVA rate was similar in A-M and A-S (83 and 87 μg kg−1 minute−1, respectively). Time to standing was longer after alfaxalone than propofol, but was not influenced by midazolam. Addition of midazolam reduced the induction doses of propofol and alfaxalone and improved the quality of induction in fentanyl-sedated dogs. The dose rate of propofol for TIVA was decreased.</description><subject>alfaxalone</subject><subject>Anesthesia Recovery Period</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Intravenous - veterinary</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Combined - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>coinduction</subject><subject>dog</subject><subject>Dogs</subject><subject>Intubation, Intratracheal - veterinary</subject><subject>midazolam</subject><subject>Midazolam - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Pregnanediones - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>propofol</subject><subject>Propofol - administration &amp; dosage</subject><issn>1467-2987</issn><issn>1467-2995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUFv1DAQhS0EoqXwA7ggH7lssL1OnIgTqqBUqsQFztY4HlOvnHhrO9su_4P_W2-37JHTWNb3nt7MI-Q9Zw1nvPu0aXYAjWBcNUw0jPMX5JzLTq3EMLQvT-9enZE3OW9YBYeWvSZnoh86JZU6J3-vZ7uMxceZ2piRwmxpwjHuMO3p3QLBlz2Njm5T3EYXwxMAwcEDhDgjvffllsb0NONS6OQt_IkBJjpGf7KuwhDv0VKzpyUWCNTPJcEO57jkaom53GL2UL9rjN_5LXnlIGR89zwvyK9vX39efl_d_Li6vvxysxrX7bqsejm0veO9kBKtlegkCGXBtcYMCqy1g0BrrGGmNXItXc-AOTYwc8A70a0vyMejb13vbqkp9OTziCHUSDWZ5oNsFe95JyvKj-iYYs4Jnd4mP0Haa870oQ290bUNfWhDM6FrG1Xz4dl-MRPak-Lf-Svw-QhgXXLnMek8epxHtL6WULSN_j_2j_3ln9Q</recordid><startdate>201709</startdate><enddate>201709</enddate><creator>Liao, PenTing</creator><creator>Sinclair, Melissa</creator><creator>Valverde, Alexander</creator><creator>Mosley, Cornelia</creator><creator>Chalmers, Heather</creator><creator>Mackenzie, Shawn</creator><creator>Hanna, Brad</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201709</creationdate><title>Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs</title><author>Liao, PenTing ; Sinclair, Melissa ; Valverde, Alexander ; Mosley, Cornelia ; Chalmers, Heather ; Mackenzie, Shawn ; Hanna, Brad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-84958f18244edd4ef4a27daf5bb97addd92edbdb0b5b434f80a0f090b4edd6263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>alfaxalone</topic><topic>Anesthesia Recovery Period</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Intravenous - veterinary</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Combined - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>coinduction</topic><topic>dog</topic><topic>Dogs</topic><topic>Intubation, Intratracheal - veterinary</topic><topic>midazolam</topic><topic>Midazolam - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Pregnanediones - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>propofol</topic><topic>Propofol - administration &amp; dosage</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Liao, PenTing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinclair, Melissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valverde, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosley, Cornelia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chalmers, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackenzie, Shawn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanna, Brad</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Liao, PenTing</au><au>Sinclair, Melissa</au><au>Valverde, Alexander</au><au>Mosley, Cornelia</au><au>Chalmers, Heather</au><au>Mackenzie, Shawn</au><au>Hanna, Brad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs</atitle><jtitle>Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia</jtitle><addtitle>Vet Anaesth Analg</addtitle><date>2017-09</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1016</spage><epage>1026</epage><pages>1016-1026</pages><issn>1467-2987</issn><eissn>1467-2995</eissn><abstract>To compare propofol and alfaxalone, with or without midazolam, for induction of anesthesia in fentanyl-sedated dogs, and to assess recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). Prospective, incomplete, Latin-square study. Ten dogs weighing 24.5 ± 3.1 kg (mean ± standard deviation). Dogs were randomly assigned to four treatments: treatment P-M, propofol (1 mg kg−1) and midazolam (0.3 mg kg−1); treatment P-S, propofol and saline; treatment A-M, alfaxalone (0.5 mg kg−1) and midazolam; treatment A-S, alfaxalone and saline, administered intravenously (IV) 10 minutes after fentanyl (7 μg kg−1) IV. Additional propofol or alfaxalone were administered as necessary for endotracheal intubation. TIVA was maintained for 35–55 minutes by infusions of propofol or alfaxalone. Scores were assigned for quality of sedation, induction, extubation and recovery. The drug doses required for intubation and TIVA, times from sedation to end of TIVA, end anesthesia to extubation and to standing were recorded. Analysis included a general linear mixed model with post hoc analysis (p &lt; 0.05). Significant differences were detected in the quality of induction, better in A-M than A-S and P-S, and in P-M than P-S; in total intubation dose, lower in P-M (1.5 mg kg−1) than P-S (2.1 mg kg−1), and A-M (0.62 mg kg−1) than A-S (0.98 mg kg−1); and lower TIVA rate in P-M (268 μg kg−1 minute−1) than P-S (310 μg kg−1 minute−1). TIVA rate was similar in A-M and A-S (83 and 87 μg kg−1 minute−1, respectively). Time to standing was longer after alfaxalone than propofol, but was not influenced by midazolam. Addition of midazolam reduced the induction doses of propofol and alfaxalone and improved the quality of induction in fentanyl-sedated dogs. The dose rate of propofol for TIVA was decreased.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>28967477</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.vaa.2017.02.011</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1467-2987
ispartof Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia, 2017-09, Vol.44 (5), p.1016-1026
issn 1467-2987
1467-2995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1945718164
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects alfaxalone
Anesthesia Recovery Period
Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods
Anesthesia, Intravenous - veterinary
Anesthetics, Combined - administration & dosage
Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage
Animals
coinduction
dog
Dogs
Intubation, Intratracheal - veterinary
midazolam
Midazolam - administration & dosage
Pregnanediones - administration & dosage
propofol
Propofol - administration & dosage
title Induction dose and recovery quality of propofol and alfaxalone with or without midazolam coinduction followed by total intravenous anesthesia in dogs
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T18%3A41%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Induction%20dose%20and%20recovery%20quality%20of%20propofol%20and%20alfaxalone%20with%20or%20without%20midazolam%20coinduction%20followed%20by%20total%20intravenous%20anesthesia%20in%20dogs&rft.jtitle=Veterinary%20anaesthesia%20and%20analgesia&rft.au=Liao,%20PenTing&rft.date=2017-09&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1016&rft.epage=1026&rft.pages=1016-1026&rft.issn=1467-2987&rft.eissn=1467-2995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.vaa.2017.02.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1945718164%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1945718164&rft_id=info:pmid/28967477&rft_els_id=S1467298717301630&rfr_iscdi=true