Grapiprant or carprofen following ovariohysterectomy in the cat: analgesic efficacy, hematological, biochemical and urinalysis evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the analgesic effect between carprofen and grapiprant every 12 or 24 h on postoperative pain in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy, in addition to the effects on the hematological, biochemical and urinalysis variables. METHODS: A total of 32 female cats were randomly divided into three groups, according to the treatment administered with the first dose given orally 90 mins before surgery, as follows: CAR (cats received 4 mg/kg carprofen, n = 11); GRA1 (cats received 2 mg/kg grapiprant, n = 10); and GRA2 (cats received 2 mg/kg grapiprant q12h, n = 11). Pain was assessed by UNESP-Botucatu Multidimensional Composite Pain Scale (UNESP) and Glasgow Feline Composite Measure Pain Scale (GLASGOW) for cats preoperatively (baseline) and at 1, 3, 6, 8, 12 and 24 h after extubation. Venous blood was collected at baseline, and 12 and 24 h after the administration of carprofen or grapiprant to perform a complete blood count (CBC), the percentage of Heinz bodies and serum biochemistry (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyltransferase, creatinine and urea). Urinalysis was performed at baseline and 24 h after extubation. Glucose levels were evaluated at baseline and 1 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Pain scores were not significantly different among groups in both scales, although pain was higher at 3 h in comparison with 24 h in all groups. In the GRA1 and GRA2 groups, 67% (14/21) of cats needed rescue analgesia compared with 18% (2/11) in the CAR group. Glucose increased from baseline to 1 h in the GRA1 and GRA2 groups. None of the CBC, serum biochemistry and urinalysis variables differed among groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Grapiprant did not promote adequate analgesia during the first 3 h postoperatively in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy compared with carprofen, and no benefits were observed by administering grapiprant every 12 h.

Sedative effects of acepromazine in combination with nalbuphine or butorphanol, intramuscularly or intravenously, in healthy cats: a randomized, blinded clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the sedative effects in cats administered acepromazine-nalbuphine and acepromazine-butorphanol, intramuscularly (IM) and intravenously (IV), and the occurrence of adverse cardiorespiratory effects. METHODS: Forty-six cats were randomly divided into four groups and administered acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) combined with nalbuphine (0.5 mg/kg) or butorphanol (0.4 mg/kg), IV (ACP-NALIV and ACP-BUTIV groups, respectively) or IM (ACP-NALIM and ACP-BUTIM groups, respectively). Sedation scores, ease of intravenous catheter placement (simple descriptive scale [SDS] scores), physiologic variables, venous blood gases and the propofol dose required for anesthetic induction were recorded. RESULTS: Mild sedation was observed in all groups approximately 30 mins after treatment administration (timepoint T1, prior to propofol administration). Sedation scores at T1 increased above baseline in all groups (P <0.05), but no significant difference was observed among groups. Dynamic interactive visual analogue scale sedation scores (range 0-100 mm) recorded at T1 were (median [interquartile range]): ACP-NALIM, 12 (10-12); ACP-NALIV, 11 (6-16); ACP-BUTIM, 11 (7-14); and ACP-BUTIV, 12 (7-19). Overall, SDS scores did not change from baseline at T1 and there was no significant difference among groups. The propofol dose did not differ among groups. Blood gases remained within the reference intervals for cats. Significant decreases from baseline were detected for all groups in systolic arterial pressure (SAP). Mean ± SD values at T1 were (mmHg): ACP-NALIM, 108 ± 13; ACP-NALIV, 102 ± 10; ACP-BUTIM, 97 ± 13; and ACP-BUTIV, 98 ± 21. Arterial hypotension (SAP <90 mmHg) was recorded at T1 in 0/11, 1/13, 4/11 and 5/11 cats in groups ACP-NALIM, ACP-NALIV, ACP-BUTIM and ACP-BUTIV, respectively, and was further exacerbated after the induction of anesthesia with propofol. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In healthy cats administered acepromazine-nalbuphine and acepromazine-butorphanol, IM and IV, the degree of sedation was mild regardless of the protocol and the route of administration. The main adverse effect observed was a reduction in arterial blood pressure.