Total intravenous anaesthesia with ketamine, medetomidine and guaifenesin compared with ketamine, medetomidine and midazolam in young horses anaesthetised for computerised tomography
Summary Background There is no information directly comparing midazolam with guaifenesin when used in combination with an alpha‐2 agonist and ketamine to maintain anaesthesia via i.v. infusion in horses. Objectives To compare ketamine–medetomidine–guaifenesin with ketamine–medetomidine–midazolam for...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Equine veterinary journal 2019-07, Vol.51 (4), p.510-516 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Summary
Background
There is no information directly comparing midazolam with guaifenesin when used in combination with an alpha‐2 agonist and ketamine to maintain anaesthesia via i.v. infusion in horses.
Objectives
To compare ketamine–medetomidine–guaifenesin with ketamine–medetomidine–midazolam for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) in young horses anaesthetised for computerised tomography.
Study design
Prospective, randomised, blinded, crossover trial.
Methods
Fourteen weanlings received medetomidine 7 μg/kg bwt i.v. and anaesthesia was induced with ketamine 2.2 mg/kg bwt i.v. On two separate occasions horses each received infusions of ketamine 3 mg/kg bwt/h, medetomidine 5 μg/kg bwt/h, guaifenesin 100 mg/kg bwt/h (KMG) or ketamine 3 mg/kg bwt/h, medetomidine 5 μg/kg bwt/h, midazolam 0.1 mg/kg bwt/h (KMM) for 50 min. Cardiorespiratory variables and anaesthetic depth were assessed every 5–10 min. Recovery times after the infusions ceased were recorded and recovery quality was assessed using a composite score system (CSS), simple descriptive scale (SDS) and visual analogue scale (VAS). Multivariable models were used to generate mean recovery scores for each treatment and each recovery score system and provide P‐values comparing treatment groups.
Results
Anaesthesia was uneventful with no difference in additional anaesthetic requirements and little clinically relevant differences in cardiopulmonary variables between groups. All horses recovered without incident with no significant difference in recovery times. Quality of the anaesthetic recovery was significantly better for the KMM group compared with the KMG group using the CSS (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0425-1644 2042-3306 |
DOI: | 10.1111/evj.13045 |