Boudreau Ainsley E, Bersenas Alexa M E, Kerr Carolyn L, Holowaychuk Marie K, Johnson Ron J
Department of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2012 Apr;22(2):239-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-4431.2012.00722.x.
To compare the recovery times, recovery quality, and cardiovascular (CV) effects of 3 anesthetic protocols during 24 hours of mechanical ventilation (MV) in healthy cats.
Prospective, randomized, crossover study.
Research laboratory at a veterinary teaching hospital.
Six healthy intact male purpose-bred cats.
Each cat was randomly assigned to receive 3 anesthetic protocols for 24 hours of MV; Protocol K consisted of ketamine, Protocol P, propofol; and Protocol PK, propofol plus fixed-rate low-dose ketamine. Each infusion drug dose was adjusted using a sedation scoring system. All protocols included fixed doses of fentanyl (10 μg/kg/h) and midazolam (0.5 mg/kg/h).
Drug doses and recovery times were recorded. Recovery quality was scored. Blood gas results, CV parameters, and frequency of bradycardia or hypotension requiring interventions were recorded. The mean d dose ± standard error of K was 81.3 ± 3.3 μg/kg/m. The median dose (95% cardiac index) of propofol (μg/kg/m) in PK was 16.0 (13.1, 19.6) and in P was 48.1 (39.3, 58.9). P necessitated significantly more propofol than PK (P < 0.05). Protocol K (35.6 ± 3.2 hours) had significantly longer times to full recovery compared to P (18.2 ± 3.2 hours). Protocol K had significantly longer times to head up, crawling, and standing compared to P and PK. Cats sedated with PK (2.33 ± 0.47) required significantly more interventions for hypotension than K (0.50 ± 0.47). Protocol P (3.2 ± 0.4) and PK (1.4 ± 0.3) required significantly more interventions for bradycardia compared to K (0.8 ± 0.3). When comparing protocol K to P and PK, significant differences in blood pressure, lactate, oxygen delivery, and oxygen consumption were noted.
Cats anesthetized with P had shorter times to full recovery compared to K. Cats anesthetized with K required fewer interventions for bradycardia or hypotension but had longer recovery times compared to P or PK. Protocol PK reduced the propofol dose required to maintain optimal anesthesia.
比较3种麻醉方案在健康猫机械通气（MV）24小时期间的恢复时间、恢复质量及心血管（CV）效应。
前瞻性、随机、交叉研究。
一家兽医教学医院的研究实验室。
6只健康的未阉割雄性专用繁殖猫。
每只猫随机分配接受3种麻醉方案进行24小时的MV；方案K由氯胺酮组成，方案P由丙泊酚组成，方案PK由丙泊酚加固定速率低剂量氯胺酮组成。每种输注药物剂量使用镇静评分系统进行调整。所有方案均包括固定剂量的芬太尼（10μg/kg/h）和咪达唑仑（0.5mg/kg/h）。
记录药物剂量和恢复时间。对恢复质量进行评分。记录血气结果、CV参数以及需要干预的心动过缓或低血压的频率。方案K的平均剂量±标准误为81.3±3.3μg/kg/m。方案PK中丙泊酚的中位剂量（95%心脏指数）（μg/kg/m）为16.0（13.1，19.6），方案P中为48.1（39.3，58.9）。方案P所需的丙泊酚显著多于方案PK（P<0.05）。与方案P（18.2±3.2小时）相比，方案K完全恢复的时间显著更长（35.6±3.2小时）。与方案P和PK相比，方案K抬头、爬行和站立的时间显著更长。用方案PK镇静的猫（2.33±0.47）因低血压需要干预的次数显著多于方案K（0.50±0.47）。与方案K（0.8±0.3）相比，方案P（3.2±0.4）和方案PK（1.4±0.3）因心动过缓需要干预的次数显著更多。在比较方案K与方案P和PK时，观察到血压、乳酸、氧输送和氧消耗存在显著差异。
与方案K相比，用方案P麻醉的猫完全恢复的时间更短。与方案P或PK相比，用方案K麻醉的猫因心动过缓或低血压需要干预的次数更少，但恢复时间更长。方案PK减少了维持最佳麻醉所需的丙泊酚剂量。
