PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Comparing two isoflurane anesthesia methods for cats in a chamber

By Schmid, Renee D et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2008·Department of Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Comparison of anesthetic induction in cats by use of isoflurane in an anesthetic chamber with a conventional vapor or liquid injection technique.

Species:
cat

Plain-English summary

Fifty-one healthy cats were studied to compare two methods of putting them under anesthesia using isoflurane. One group was placed in an induction chamber with a vaporizer, while the other group had liquid isoflurane injected into the chamber. The cats that received the liquid injection showed a quicker and smoother transition into anesthesia, with less noticeable agitation during the process. This means that using the liquid injection method can make the experience less stressful for cats when they need anesthesia.

People also search for: cat anesthesia methods · isoflurane induction for cats · how to prepare cat for surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 techniques for induction of cats by use of isoflurane in an anesthetic chamber. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study. ANIMALS: 51 healthy cats. PROCEDURES: Cats were randomly allocated to 2 induction techniques. Cats were premedicated with acepromazine (0.1 mg/kg [0.045 mg/lb], SC) and buprenorphine (0.01 mg/kg [0.0045 mg/lb], SC) 30 minutes before induction. Cats were then placed into an induction chamber, and anesthetic induction was initiated. One technique involved a conventional flow-through system that used an oxygen flowmeter and an isoflurane vaporizer to flow vapors into the induction chamber. Alternatively, liquid isoflurane was injected into a vaporization tray that was mounted to the interior surface of the chamber lid. Inductions were videotaped for analysis. Five variables (head bobbing, head swinging side to side, paddling, rotating 180 degrees to 360 degrees, and rolling over or flipping) were scored to assess induction quality. Time variables recorded during induction corresponded to the interval until onset of excitatory motion, duration of excitatory motion, interval until recumbency, and interval until complete induction. RESULTS: Compared with cats anesthetized by use of a conventional vapor chamber technique, cats anesthetized by use of the liquid injection technique had a significantly shorter interval until recumbency and interval until complete induction and lower scores for quality of induction, indicating a smoother induction. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Anesthetic induction in cats by use of a liquid injection technique was more rapid and provided a better quality of induction, compared with results for cats induced by use of a conventional vapor technique.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18627229/