Influence of gabapentin on the degree of sedation, physiological variables and propofol dosage in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone: a randomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.

IF 1.8 3区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Veterinary Research Communications Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-24 DOI:10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2
João Victor Barbieri Ferronatto, Eduardo Raposo Monteiro, Bárbara Silva Correia, Haiumy Garcia Cardozo, Izadora Loeff Zardo, Fábio Trindade Dutra de Almeida Filho
{"title":"Influence of gabapentin on the degree of sedation, physiological variables and propofol dosage in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone: a randomized, prospective, blinded, clinical study.","authors":"João Victor Barbieri Ferronatto, Eduardo Raposo Monteiro, Bárbara Silva Correia, Haiumy Garcia Cardozo, Izadora Loeff Zardo, Fábio Trindade Dutra de Almeida Filho","doi":"10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the influence of gabapentin on sedation, propofol dosage, and physiological variables in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone. Thirty-four cats were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral gabapentin (Gabapentin group) or placebo (Control group) 100 min before intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) plus methadone (0.3 mg/kg). Variables recorded included sedation, using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, range 0-100 mm) and a Numeric Descriptive Scale (NDS, range 0-14), heart rate, respiratory rate and Doppler systolic arterial pressure (SAP). All variables were measured before (T0), 100 min after administration of gabapentin or placebo (T1), and 30 min after premedication (T2). Physiological variables were also recorded after anesthetic induction with propofol (T3). At T2, NDS scores were higher in Gabapentin than the Control group [median (interquartile range): 4 (2-5) versus 2 (1-4), p = 0.028], whereas DIVAS scores were not significantly different [Control: 9 (4-13); Gabapentin: 12 (5-32)]. Despite the significant difference between groups in NDS scores, overall sedation scores were mild at T1 and T2 regardless of gabapentin administration. The propofol dosage did not differ between groups. The most concerning adverse effect was arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), recorded only at T3 in 71% of cats in the Control group and 100% in the Gabapentin group, without significant difference between groups. Administration of gabapentin before premedication with acepromazine and methadone in healthy cats did not result in a clinically significant influence on sedation levels, physiological variables, or propofol dosage required for anesthesia induction.</p>","PeriodicalId":23690,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Research Communications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Research Communications","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-024-10546-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study evaluated the influence of gabapentin on sedation, propofol dosage, and physiological variables in cats premedicated with acepromazine and methadone. Thirty-four cats were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of oral gabapentin (Gabapentin group) or placebo (Control group) 100 min before intramuscular premedication with acepromazine (0.05 mg/kg) plus methadone (0.3 mg/kg). Variables recorded included sedation, using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS, range 0-100 mm) and a Numeric Descriptive Scale (NDS, range 0-14), heart rate, respiratory rate and Doppler systolic arterial pressure (SAP). All variables were measured before (T0), 100 min after administration of gabapentin or placebo (T1), and 30 min after premedication (T2). Physiological variables were also recorded after anesthetic induction with propofol (T3). At T2, NDS scores were higher in Gabapentin than the Control group [median (interquartile range): 4 (2-5) versus 2 (1-4), p = 0.028], whereas DIVAS scores were not significantly different [Control: 9 (4-13); Gabapentin: 12 (5-32)]. Despite the significant difference between groups in NDS scores, overall sedation scores were mild at T1 and T2 regardless of gabapentin administration. The propofol dosage did not differ between groups. The most concerning adverse effect was arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), recorded only at T3 in 71% of cats in the Control group and 100% in the Gabapentin group, without significant difference between groups. Administration of gabapentin before premedication with acepromazine and methadone in healthy cats did not result in a clinically significant influence on sedation levels, physiological variables, or propofol dosage required for anesthesia induction.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加巴喷丁对预先服用阿司丙嗪和美沙酮的猫的镇静程度、生理变量和异丙酚用量的影响:一项随机、前瞻性、盲法临床研究。
本研究评估了加巴喷丁对使用阿司丙嗪和美沙酮预处理的猫的镇静、异丙酚用量和生理变量的影响。34 只猫被随机分配到口服 100 毫克加巴喷丁(加巴喷丁组)或安慰剂(对照组),100 分钟后再肌肉注射阿司丙嗪(0.05 毫克/千克)和美沙酮(0.3 毫克/千克)进行预处理。记录的变量包括镇静(使用动态交互视觉模拟量表(DIVAS,范围 0-100 mm)和数字描述量表(NDS,范围 0-14))、心率、呼吸频率和多普勒收缩动脉压(SAP)。所有变量均在服用加巴喷丁或安慰剂前(T0)、服用后 100 分钟(T1)和服用前 30 分钟(T2)进行测量。丙泊酚麻醉诱导后(T3)也记录了生理变量。在 T2,加巴喷丁组的 NDS 评分高于对照组[中位数(四分位数间距):4(2-5)对 2(1-4),p = 0.028],而 DIVAS 评分无显著差异[对照组:9(4-13);加巴喷丁:12(5-32)]。尽管各组间的 NDS 评分存在显著差异,但无论使用何种加巴喷丁,T1 和 T2 的总体镇静评分均为轻度。异丙酚用量在各组之间没有差异。最令人担忧的不良反应是动脉低血压(SAP
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Veterinary Research Communications
Veterinary Research Communications 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Veterinary Research Communications publishes fully refereed research articles and topical reviews on all aspects of the veterinary sciences. Interdisciplinary articles are particularly encouraged, as are well argued reviews, even if they are somewhat controversial. The journal is an appropriate medium in which to publish new methods, newly described diseases and new pathological findings, as these are applied to animals. The material should be of international rather than local interest. As it deliberately seeks a wide coverage, Veterinary Research Communications provides its readers with a means of keeping abreast of current developments in the entire field of veterinary science.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Tick control prevents carcass condemnations in lambs caused by Anaplasma ovis. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius: epidemiological changes, antibiotic resistance, and alternative therapeutic strategies. Quantitative proteomic analysis of PK-15 cells infected with porcine circovirus type 3 using 4D-DIA approach. SARS-CoV-2 exposure in hunting and stray dogs of southern Italy. Synonymous codon usage influences the transmission of peste des petits ruminants (PPR) virus in camels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1