Canfrán S, Bustamante R, González P, Cediel R, Re M, de Segura I A Gómez
Anaesthesiology Service, Dept. of Animal Medicine and Surgery, Veterinary Clinical Hospital, Veterinary Faculty, Complutense University of Madrid, Avda. Puerta de Hierro s/n 28040, Madrid, Spain.
Anaesthesiology Service, Dept. of Animal Medicine and Surgery, Veterinary Clinical Hospital, Veterinary Faculty, Complutense University of Madrid, Avda. Puerta de Hierro s/n 28040, Madrid, Spain.
Vet J. 2016 Apr;210:56-60. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.01.015. Epub 2016 Feb 1.
The objectives of this study were to determine: (1) the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine in combination with methadone, midazolam, or both, and (2) the propofol dose required to achieve endotracheal intubation in healthy dogs. Seven healthy Beagle dogs were included in a prospective experimental, crossover, randomised and masked design. All dogs received four treatments IM, with at least 1 week between sessions, as follows: dexmedetomidine 5 µg/kg (D) alone, or combined with methadone 0.3 mg/kg (DMe), midazolam 0.3 mg/kg (DMi), or both (DMeMi). The degree of sedation was evaluated using a numerical scale (maximum 15 points). The dose of propofol required for intubation was also calculated for each group. Recovery time and quality were determined. Statistical analysis was performed using parametric (ANOVA) and nonparametric tests (Friedman, Cochran Q), as appropriate. The degree of sedation obtained with DMe and DMeMi (13, [7-14]; 13, [6-14], respectively) was significantly higher than in the control group (2, [1-4]; P = 0.023, P = 0.006, respectively). The required dose of propofol was lower in all groups (DMi, 1.5 ± 0.5 mg/kg, P = 0.002; DMe, 1.2 ± 0.5 mg/kg, P <0.001; DMeMi, 0.9 ± 0.3 mg/kg) than in the control group (2.9 ± 0.9 mg/kg; P <0.001). Recovery quality was not different between groups (P = 0.137). In healthy dogs, the addition of midazolam did not enhance the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine or a dexmedetomidine-methadone combination at the doses studied, and propofol requirements were reduced. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine was enhanced with methadone, and the required dose of propofol was reduced.
(1)右美托咪定与美沙酮、咪达唑仑或两者联合使用的镇静效果,以及(2)健康犬只实现气管插管所需的丙泊酚剂量。七只健康的比格犬纳入一项前瞻性实验、交叉、随机和盲法设计。所有犬只接受四种肌肉注射治疗,各疗程之间至少间隔1周,具体如下:单独使用右美托咪定5μg/kg(D),或与美沙酮0.3mg/kg联合使用(DMe)、与咪达唑仑0.3mg/kg联合使用(DMi),或与两者联合使用(DMeMi)。使用数字评分量表(最高15分)评估镇静程度。还计算了每组插管所需的丙泊酚剂量。确定恢复时间和恢复质量。根据情况使用参数检验(方差分析)和非参数检验(弗里德曼检验、 Cochr an Q检验)进行统计分析。DMe组和DMeMi组获得的镇静程度(分别为13,[7 - 14];13,[6 - 14])显著高于对照组(2,[1 - 4];P分别为0.023、0.006)。所有组所需的丙泊酚剂量(DMi组,1.5±0.5mg/kg,P = 0.002;DMe组,1.2±0.5mg/kg,P <0.001;DMeMi组,0.9±0.3mg/kg)均低于对照组(2.9±0.9mg/kg;P <0.001)。各组之间的恢复质量无差异(P = 0.137)。在健康犬只中,在所研究的剂量下,添加咪达唑仑并未增强右美托咪定或右美托咪定 - 美沙酮组合的镇静效果,但丙泊酚需求量降低。右美托咪定与美沙酮联合使用时镇静效果增强,且所需的丙泊酚剂量降低。