LeGrand Jessica L, Ozawa Sarah M, Silverstein-Metzler Marnie G, Estes Jenny M, Moiseiwitsch Nina A, Stephens Jazz Q, Atkins Hannah M, Petritz Olivia A
1Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
2Department of Laboratory Animal Resources, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2025 Jun 1;64(4):1-8. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-25-012.
Peripheral venous access in rabbits can be difficult to obtain. When failure occurs, there is a dire need for alternative vascular access routes to be available. The AVMA categorizes intrarenal injection of pentobarbital as acceptable with conditions for euthanasia. Animals must be in an unconscious state, and only minimal studies using intrarenal administration have been reported. A total of 53 rabbits were used to conduct 3 separate analyses to assess and measure the efficacy, efficiency, and validity of the intrarenal route for euthanasia in New Zealand White rabbits by assessing the time to cardiopulmonary arrest (TCPA). Animals were sedated with 40 mg/kg ketamine and 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine intramuscularly into the lumbar muscles, and timing started at the beginning of the injection and ended when cardiac and respiratory arrest were observed. Cardiac and respiratory arrest following intravenous injection of pentobarbital was significantly quicker (cardiac, 6 to 24 s, median 9 s; respiratory, 6 to 19 s, median 9 s; P < 0.001) than for the intrarenal route (cardiac, 40 to 900 s, median 411 s; respiratory, 23 to 900 s, median 120 s; P < 0.001), with no negative animal reactions observed during euthanasia injection performance. Four animals did not achieve TCPA within 15 min after administration. Although TCPA was longer with intrarenal compared with intravenous euthanasia (P < 0.001), this study demonstrates that the intrarenal approach under anesthesia is a feasible alternative to the intravenous approach, as it can be reliably performed without observed animal distress or alterations in organ pathology. The overall information from this study can help guide both laboratory and practicing clinicians considering this technique. Still, factors such as variable times to cardiopulmonary arrest and technical skill should be considered.
在家兔身上获取外周静脉通路可能很困难。当出现失败情况时,迫切需要有其他血管通路可用。美国兽医协会(AVMA)将肾内注射戊巴比妥归类为在符合安乐死条件下是可接受的。动物必须处于无意识状态,并且仅有少量使用肾内给药的研究报告。总共使用了53只家兔进行3项独立分析,通过评估心肺骤停时间(TCPA)来评估和测量新西兰白兔肾内安乐死途径的有效性、效率和正确性。动物通过肌肉注射40mg/kg氯胺酮和50μg/kg右美托咪定进行镇静,时间从注射开始起计时,直至观察到心脏和呼吸骤停结束。静脉注射戊巴比妥后的心脏和呼吸骤停明显比肾内途径更快(心脏,6至24秒,中位数9秒;呼吸,6至19秒,中位数9秒;P<0.001)(心脏,40至900秒,中位数411秒;呼吸,23至900秒,中位数120秒;P<0.001),在安乐死注射过程中未观察到动物有负面反应。4只动物在给药后15分钟内未达到TCPA。虽然与静脉安乐死相比,肾内途径的TCPA更长(P<0.001),但本研究表明,麻醉下的肾内途径是静脉途径的一种可行替代方法,因为它可以可靠地实施,且未观察到动物痛苦或器官病理学改变。本研究的总体信息有助于指导考虑采用该技术的实验室人员和临床医生。不过,仍应考虑诸如心肺骤停时间可变和技术技能等因素。