Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Sedation effects on heart function in cats with thickened heart muscle
By Keating, Stephanie et al.·Published in Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia·2024·Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Echocardiographic and hemodynamic effects of alfaxalone or dexmedetomidine based sedation protocols in cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a pilot study.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of 10 cats with a heart condition called hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) were sedated using either alfaxalone or dexmedetomidine to see how it affected their heart function. The cats that received the alfaxalone-based sedation showed stable heart function, while those sedated with dexmedetomidine experienced slower heart rates and other heart-related issues. When both groups were put under general anesthesia, their heart performance was similar, but both protocols caused some heart function changes. Overall, the alfaxalone protocol was better for maintaining heart stability during sedation in these cats.
People also search for: cat heart disease treatment · alfaxalone sedation for cats · dexmedetomidine effects on cat heart
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report the effects of alfaxalone and dexmedetomidine based sedation protocols on echocardiographic and hemodynamic variables in cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) during sedation and inhalational anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, experimental study. ANIMALS: A group of 10 client-owned cats with subclinical HCM. METHODS: Cats were administered one of two sedative intramuscular combinations: protocol ABM (alfaxalone 2 mg kg, butorphanol 0.4 mg kg, midazolam 0.2 mg kg; n = 5) or protocol DBM (dexmedetomidine 8 μg kg, butorphanol 0.4 mg kg, midazolam 0.2 mg kg; n = 5). General anesthesia was induced with intravenous alfaxalone and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. Echocardiographic variables and noninvasive arterial blood pressures were obtained before sedation, following sedation, and during inhalational anesthesia. Sedation scores and alfaxalone induction dose requirements were recorded. Descriptive statistics are reported for cardiovascular variables. RESULTS: During sedation, echocardiographic and hemodynamic variables remained within normal limits with protocol ABM, whereas protocol DBM was characterized by bradycardia, low cardiac index and elevated blood pressure. During isoflurane anesthesia, both protocols demonstrated similar hemodynamic performance, with heart rates of 98 ± 12 and 89 ± 11 beats min, cardiac index values of 68 ± 17 and 47 ± 13 mL minkgand Doppler blood pressures of 72 ± 15 and 79 ± 20 mmHg with protocols ABM and DBM, respectively. A reduction in myocardial velocities were also observed during atrial and ventricular contraction with both protocols during isoflurane anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: An alfaxalone based protocol offered hemodynamic stability during sedation in cats with HCM; however, both dexmedetomidine and alfaxalone based protocols resulted in clinically relevant hemodynamic compromise during isoflurane anesthesia. Further studies are required to determine optimal sedative and anesthetic protocols in cats with HCM.
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/38114388/