436只宠物狗在安乐死前单独使用戊巴比妥-苯妥英与使用丙泊酚的比较

Jessica M Bullock, Travis M Lanaux, Justin W Shmalberg
{"title":"436只宠物狗在安乐死前单独使用戊巴比妥-苯妥英与使用丙泊酚的比较","authors":"Jessica M Bullock,&nbsp;Travis M Lanaux,&nbsp;Justin W Shmalberg","doi":"10.1111/vec.12813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report the incidence of adverse events during euthanasia of client-owned dogs administered either intravenous pentobarbital/phenytoin (PP) or PP after propofol delivery.</p><p><strong>Design/setting: </strong>Prospective, observational, multi-site study.</p><p><strong>Animals: </strong>Four hundred thirty-six dogs undergoing client-elected euthanasia over a 1-year period.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Interventions included placement of an IV catheter and delivery of euthanasia agents (PP for the PP group, propofol followed by PP for the propofol group). Seven pre-determined adverse events were recorded: agonal breaths, urination, defecation, vocalization, muscle activity, dysphoria, and catheter complications. Euthanasia scores for each patient were defined as the sum of all adverse events (0-7) the patient exhibited.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Two hundred thirty-six dogs were in the PP group and 200 dogs were in the propofol group. No significant differences were detected in the dose of PP administered (166.9 ± 105.6 mg/kg for PP group, 182.6 ± 109.8 mg/kg for propofol group). Propofol dogs received 4.5 ± 2.9 mg/kg propofol. The incidence of ≥ 1 adverse event was 35.2% in the PP group and 26.5% in the propofol group (P = 0.052). Mean euthanasia scores (0.47 PP group, 0.32 propofol group) were not significantly different (P = 0.08). Propofol significantly reduced the incidence of muscle activity (6% vs. 14%, odds ratio 0.39; P = 0.0079).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference in the likelihood of the studied adverse events during client-elected euthanasia in dogs when propofol was used prior to PP. There was a significant reduction in perimortem muscle activity if propofol was given prior to PP.</p>","PeriodicalId":74015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/vec.12813","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of pentobarbital-phenytoin alone vs propofol prior to pentobarbital-phenytoin for euthanasia in 436 client-owned dogs.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica M Bullock,&nbsp;Travis M Lanaux,&nbsp;Justin W Shmalberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/vec.12813\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report the incidence of adverse events during euthanasia of client-owned dogs administered either intravenous pentobarbital/phenytoin (PP) or PP after propofol delivery.</p><p><strong>Design/setting: </strong>Prospective, observational, multi-site study.</p><p><strong>Animals: </strong>Four hundred thirty-six dogs undergoing client-elected euthanasia over a 1-year period.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Interventions included placement of an IV catheter and delivery of euthanasia agents (PP for the PP group, propofol followed by PP for the propofol group). Seven pre-determined adverse events were recorded: agonal breaths, urination, defecation, vocalization, muscle activity, dysphoria, and catheter complications. Euthanasia scores for each patient were defined as the sum of all adverse events (0-7) the patient exhibited.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>Two hundred thirty-six dogs were in the PP group and 200 dogs were in the propofol group. No significant differences were detected in the dose of PP administered (166.9 ± 105.6 mg/kg for PP group, 182.6 ± 109.8 mg/kg for propofol group). Propofol dogs received 4.5 ± 2.9 mg/kg propofol. The incidence of ≥ 1 adverse event was 35.2% in the PP group and 26.5% in the propofol group (P = 0.052). Mean euthanasia scores (0.47 PP group, 0.32 propofol group) were not significantly different (P = 0.08). Propofol significantly reduced the incidence of muscle activity (6% vs. 14%, odds ratio 0.39; P = 0.0079).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference in the likelihood of the studied adverse events during client-elected euthanasia in dogs when propofol was used prior to PP. There was a significant reduction in perimortem muscle activity if propofol was given prior to PP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/vec.12813\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12813\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/2/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:报告客户犬在异丙酚输注后静脉注射戊巴比妥/苯妥英(PP)或PP时安乐死过程中不良事件的发生率。设计/环境:前瞻性、观察性、多地点研究。动物:436只狗在一年的时间里接受了客户选择的安乐死。干预措施:干预措施包括放置静脉导管和使用安乐死药物(PP组为PP,丙泊酚组为丙泊酚)。记录了七个预先确定的不良事件:呼吸异常、排尿、排便、发声、肌肉活动、烦躁不安和导管并发症。每个患者的安乐死评分定义为患者表现出的所有不良事件(0-7)的总和。测量结果及主要结果:PP组236只,异丙酚组200只。PP给药剂量(PP组为166.9±105.6 mg/kg,异丙酚组为182.6±109.8 mg/kg)差异无统计学意义。异丙酚狗接受4.5±2.9 mg/kg异丙酚。PP组≥1次不良事件发生率为35.2%,异丙酚组为26.5% (P = 0.052)。平均安乐死评分(PP组0.47分,异丙酚组0.32分)差异无统计学意义(P = 0.08)。异丙酚显著降低肌肉活动发生率(6% vs. 14%,优势比0.39;P = 0.0079)。结论:在PP之前使用异丙酚对狗进行安乐死时,所研究的不良事件的可能性没有差异。如果在PP之前使用异丙酚,死前肌肉活动显着降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of pentobarbital-phenytoin alone vs propofol prior to pentobarbital-phenytoin for euthanasia in 436 client-owned dogs.

Objective: To report the incidence of adverse events during euthanasia of client-owned dogs administered either intravenous pentobarbital/phenytoin (PP) or PP after propofol delivery.

Design/setting: Prospective, observational, multi-site study.

Animals: Four hundred thirty-six dogs undergoing client-elected euthanasia over a 1-year period.

Interventions: Interventions included placement of an IV catheter and delivery of euthanasia agents (PP for the PP group, propofol followed by PP for the propofol group). Seven pre-determined adverse events were recorded: agonal breaths, urination, defecation, vocalization, muscle activity, dysphoria, and catheter complications. Euthanasia scores for each patient were defined as the sum of all adverse events (0-7) the patient exhibited.

Measurements and main results: Two hundred thirty-six dogs were in the PP group and 200 dogs were in the propofol group. No significant differences were detected in the dose of PP administered (166.9 ± 105.6 mg/kg for PP group, 182.6 ± 109.8 mg/kg for propofol group). Propofol dogs received 4.5 ± 2.9 mg/kg propofol. The incidence of ≥ 1 adverse event was 35.2% in the PP group and 26.5% in the propofol group (P = 0.052). Mean euthanasia scores (0.47 PP group, 0.32 propofol group) were not significantly different (P = 0.08). Propofol significantly reduced the incidence of muscle activity (6% vs. 14%, odds ratio 0.39; P = 0.0079).

Conclusions: There was no difference in the likelihood of the studied adverse events during client-elected euthanasia in dogs when propofol was used prior to PP. There was a significant reduction in perimortem muscle activity if propofol was given prior to PP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Owner experiences with and perceptions of owner-witnessed CPR in veterinary medicine. Development and implementation of a hemovigilance program at a university veterinary teaching hospital. 2022 Update of the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) Domain 1- Defining populations at risk. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2021. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2020.
×
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