Pain and analgesia in pet rabbits within the veterinary environment: a review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of pain and analgesia in rabbits with the aim of developing a more accurate understanding of these topics. To illustrate and discuss the areas that have advanced in recent years and those that still require further research. DATABASES USED: Three key subject resources were used: Web of Science, Medline and CAB Abstracts. Search terms were rabbits, lagomorphs, laboratory animals, pet, pain, surgical procedures, ovariohysterectomy, orchiectomy, castration, analgesia, opioids, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. References from books and articles relevant to the topics were also included. CONCLUSIONS: Rabbit medicine has improved over the last 20 years, but the literature suggests that pain management in this species is still inadequate and veterinary professionals believe their knowledge of pain and analgesia in this species is limited. Assessment and quantification of pain in rabbits can be challenging in a clinical environment not only because, as a prey species, rabbits tend to hide signs of pain but also because there are no validated methods to assess pain, except the Rabbit Grimace Scale, which is based on only one rabbit breed. Current consensus is that perioperative multimodal analgesia is the best practice. However, it is not widely used in rabbits. In rabbits, analgesia protocols and dosages reported in the literature are often poorly researched and do not result in complete pain amelioration with the return of normal. The present literature on rabbit pain and analgesia presents gaps either due to unexplored areas or insufficient findings. Further research should focus on these areas with the aim of improving the welfare of rabbits within a veterinary clinic.

Electrosurgery reduces blood loss and immediate postoperative inflammation compared to cold instruments for midline celiotomy in dogs: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of an electrosurgical device with traditional cold instruments (scalpel and scissors) for midline celiotomy incision. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. SAMPLE POPULATION: One hundred and twenty client-owned dogs undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: Dogs were prospectively recruited and randomized to receive electroincision or cold instrument incision. For cold incision, surgeons used basic surgical instruments including scalpel and scissors. For electroincision, surgeons only used the electrosurgical device in cutting mode. Time for the approach, blood loss, and the incision length were recorded. A blinded observer assessed pain and incision redness, swelling, and discharge at 24 and 48 hours postoperative (graded 0-3). Owner assessment of incision healing was recorded by telephone interview. RESULTS: Blood loss during surgery was significantly lower for electroincision (mean 0.7, SD 1.7 mL) than cold incision (mean 3.0, SD 4.3 mL, P < .0001) with no significant difference in incision length or time for approach. Electroincision was associated with significantly less incision redness (cold median 1, range 0-3; electroincision median 0, range 0-2, P = .02) and less incision discharge (cold median 0.5 range 0-3; electroincision median 0, range 0-1, P = .006) at 24 hours postoperative. There was no significant difference in pain scores or incision healing in dogs receiving the two techniques. No incisional hernias were reported. A surgical site infection occurred in 1 dog (cold incision). CONCLUSIONS: Electroincision for a celiotomy approach in the dog reduces blood loss, and incision redness and discharge in the immediate postoperative period without affecting the occurrence of wound complications such as infection and dehiscence (including linea alba).

A model of corneal graft rejection in semi-inbred NIH miniature swine: significant T-cell infiltration of clinically accepted allografts.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study is to develop a pre-clinical model of corneal graft rejection in the semi-inbred NIH minipig as a model of human rejection. METHODS: NIH minipigs received corneal allografts with MHC and minor mismatches, or minor mismatches alone. Clinical rejection was monitored, and major subsets of leukocytes and ingress of vessels were quantified post-mortem by automated digital methods. Spectratypes of recipient T-cell receptor ß-subunit variable region (TRßV) were analyzed. The capacity of pig corneal endothelial cells to proliferate in vivo was assessed. RESULTS: Autografts (n = 5) and SLA(cc) to SLA(cc) allografts (minor mismatches, n = 5) were not rejected. Median graft survival of SLA(dd) and SLA(bb) allografts in SLA(cc) strain recipients (major and minor mismatches) was 57 (n = 10) and 67 (n = 6) days, respectively. Rejected grafts did not recover clarity in vivo, and corneal endothelial cells did not proliferate in organ culture after cryo-injury. There were significantly more leukocytes in clinically rejected versus accepted grafts (P < 0.0001) and in transplanted versus contralateral eyes (P < 0.0001). Numbers of T-cells were significantly greater in clinically accepted grafts versus autografts and in rejected grafts versus accepted (P < 0.005 for most subsets). There were significant differences in TRßV spectratype between graft groups in cornea, but not in draining lymph node or blood (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The NIH minipig offers a robust model of human rejection suitable for immunological or therapeutic studies. In particular, there is limited capacity for corneal endothelial repair in vivo, and histological evidence suggests that allosensitization of the recipient may develop in the absence of clinical rejection.