Lervik Andreas, Forr Toverud Simen, Bohlin Jon, Haga Henning Andreas
Department of Companion Animal Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.
Animal Health and Welfare Branch, Veterinary Inspectorate, Norwegian Armed Forces Joint Medical Services, Sessvollmoen, Norway.
Front Vet Sci. 2021 May 20;8:664112. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.664112. eCollection 2021.
Pigs are anesthetized when used for emergency procedures live tissue training (LTT) of civilian and military medical personnel or for experimental purposes, but there is a paucity in the literature regarding anesthesia of pigs for this purpose. The main goals of the study were to compare oxygen debt, macrocirculatory parameters, and time to cardiac arrest between pigs in hemorrhagic shock and anesthetized with propofol-ketamine-dexmedetomidine or alfaxalone-ketamine-dexmedetomidine. A prospective, non-blinded randomized study design was used. Sixteen pigs were randomized in blocks of four to be anesthetized with either propofol-ketamine-dexmedetomidine ( = 8) or alfaxalone-ketamine-dexmedetomidine ( = 8) as a continuous infusion. Premedication with ketamine 15 mg kg and midazolam 1 mg kg was given i.m. Anesthesia was maintained with propofol 8 mg kg h or alfaxalone 5 mg kg h combined with ketamine 5 mg kg h and dexmedetomidine 4 μg kg h i.v. A stepwise, volume-controlled model for hemorrhage was created by exsanguination. Indices of oxygen debt (lactate, base excess, and oxygen extraction), macrocirculatory (PR, SAP, DAP, MAP, and , SVI, and TPR) variables, and time to death was compared between groups. Pigs in the alfaxalone group had significantly higher SAP than pigs given propofol. No difference in other macrocirculatory variables or indices of oxygen debt could be found. A blood loss of 50% of the total blood volume or more was possible in most pigs with both anesthetic regimes. Pigs anesthetized with propofol or alfaxalone combined with ketamine and dexmedetomidine tolerated substantial blood loss.
猪在用于民用和军事医务人员的急诊程序活体组织训练(LTT)或实验目的时会被麻醉,但关于为此目的对猪进行麻醉的文献较少。本研究的主要目的是比较失血性休克的猪在使用丙泊酚 - 氯胺酮 - 右美托咪定或阿法沙龙 - 氯胺酮 - 右美托咪定麻醉时的氧债、大循环参数和心脏骤停时间。采用前瞻性、非盲随机研究设计。16头猪按每组4头进行随机分组,分别接受丙泊酚 - 氯胺酮 - 右美托咪定(n = 8)或阿法沙龙 - 氯胺酮 - 右美托咪定(n = 8)持续输注麻醉。术前肌肉注射氯胺酮15 mg/kg和咪达唑仑1 mg/kg。麻醉维持采用丙泊酚8 mg·kg⁻¹·h或阿法沙龙5 mg·kg⁻¹·h,联合氯胺酮5 mg·kg⁻¹·h和右美托咪定4 μg·kg⁻¹·h静脉输注。通过放血建立逐步的容量控制出血模型。比较两组之间的氧债指标(乳酸、碱剩余和氧摄取)、大循环(PR、SAP、DAP、MAP以及CI、SVI和TPR)变量和死亡时间。阿法沙龙组的猪的SAP显著高于给予丙泊酚的猪。在其他大循环变量或氧债指标方面未发现差异。两种麻醉方案下,大多数猪都有可能失血达总血容量的50%或更多。用丙泊酚或阿法沙龙联合氯胺酮和右美托咪定麻醉的猪能耐受大量失血。