Objective: To identify anaesthesia-related risk between common domestic species and humans by analysing peer-reviewed and other literature on anaesthesia in great apes in both human care and free-ranging settings and thereby to identify knowledge gaps.
Databases used: We conducted literature searches in the CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE and Zoological Record databases, as well as conference proceedings of the American Association of Zoo Veterinarians, the British Veterinary Zoological Society and the European Association of Zoo and Wildlife Veterinarians.
Results: Of the 142 studies reviewed, 51 were conference abstracts and 91 were peer-reviewed journal articles. There was a steady increase in the number of published papers since 1960, surpassing 30 papers per decade since 2000. Case studies and series made up 79% of included studies, and 91-94% for all species except chimpanzees. Although data for chimpanzees appeared extensive, data for bonobos, eastern gorillas, and Sumatran orangutans were notably lacking. Infant great ape anaesthesia and anaesthesia in free-ranging settings were underrepresented in the literature. Over 50 anaesthetic drugs were reported in the literature, with ketamine, tiletamine/zolazepam, midazolam, medetomidine and isoflurane being most frequently reported. There is a notable lack of reporting of anaesthesia-related adverse events (AEs), and many studies failed to report key details, which limits reproducibility. Respiratory and cardiovascular AEs were reported most frequently. The incidence of prolonged recoveries and excitation on recovery was higher than in other domestic species, and there was a notable lack of hypothermia reported as an AEs.
Conclusions and clinical relevance: This is the first evidence synthesis on general anaesthesia in great apes, and findings highlight the need for targeted research on underrepresented species and improved reporting of anaesthesia practices and AEs.

