Chronotropic effect of propofol or alfaxalone following fentanyl administration in healthy dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of alfaxalone and propofol on heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) after fentanyl administration in healthy dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomised clinical study. ANIMALS: Fifty healthy client owned dogs (ASA I/II) requiring general anaesthesia for elective magnetic resonance imaging for neurological conditions. METHODS: All dogs received fentanyl 7 µg kg(-1) IV and were allocated randomly to receive either alfaxalone (n = 25) or propofol (n = 25) to effect until endotracheal (ET) intubation was possible. Heart rate and oscillometric BP were measured before fentanyl (baseline), after fentanyl (Time F) and after ET intubation (Time GA). Post-induction apnoea were recorded. Data were analysed using Fisher's exact test, Mann Whitney U test and one-way anova for repeated measures as appropriate; p value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Dogs receiving propofol showed a greater decrease in HR (-14 beat minute(-1) , range -47 to 10) compared to alfaxalone (1 beat minute(-1) , range -33 to 26) (p = 0.0116). Blood pressure decreased over the three time periods with no difference between groups. Incidence of post-induction apnoea was not different between groups. CONCLUSION: Following fentanyl administration, anaesthetic induction with propofol resulted in a greater negative chronotropic effect while alfaxalone preserved or increased HR. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Following fentanyl administration, HR decreases more frequently when propofol rather than alfaxalone is used as induction agent. However, given the high individual variability and the small change in predicted HR (-7.7 beats per minute after propofol), the clinical impact arising from choosing propofol or alfaxalone is likely to be small in healthy animals. Further studies in dogs with myocardial disease and altered haemodynamics are warranted.

Use of wound infusion catheters for postoperative local anaesthetic administration in cats.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to document the use of the wound infusion catheter (WIC) following a variety of surgical procedures in cats, investigating complications and risk factors associated with catheter placement or local anaesthetic (LA) administration. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentric study was performed. Medical databases of eight veterinary referral hospitals from 2010 to 2021 were searched to identify records of cats where WICs were used. Information regarding signalment, type of surgery, size and type of WIC placed, and LA protocol used, as well as postoperative complications, were retrieved. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six cases fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Feline injection site sarcoma resection was the most common surgery. Overall complications were identified in 22/166 cats (13.2%). Thirteen cats (7.8%) experienced wound-related complications, whereas nine cats (5.4%) experienced drug-delivery complications. The only factor associated with an increased risk of complications was the amount of a single dose of LA delivered through the catheter (P <0.001). An amount higher than 2.5 ml of LA delivered at each administration was associated with an increased risk of complications. All complications were minor and self-limiting. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: WICs were used for a large variety of surgical procedures with different protocols of LA administration as part of a multimodal analgesic plan in cats. The risk of complications was relatively low and self-limiting, suggesting its safe use in cats. Further prospective studies are required to evaluate efficacy of postoperative analgesia and to determine the suitable protocol for WIC handling and maintenance.