PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Comparing two anesthesia methods for dog radiotherapy safety

By Lehnus, Kristina S & Brearley, Jacqueline·Published in Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia·2019·Department of Veterinary Medicine, United Kingdom·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Evaluation of two different radiotherapy anaesthetic protocols for dogs: a randomized clinical crossover trial.

Species:
dog
Behaviour & energyDogs

Plain-English summary

A group of 40 dogs undergoing radiotherapy were given two different anesthesia protocols to see which worked better. One group received a mix of alfentanil and propofol, while the other group received alfentanil with atropine followed by propofol. The dogs in both groups had similar recovery times and quality, but those on the alfentanil-atropine protocol experienced more cases of low blood pressure. Owners reported that their dogs returned to normal behavior and appetite by the next morning after the procedure.

People also search for: dog radiotherapy anesthesia · dog low blood pressure during anesthesia · dog recovery after anesthesia

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe alfentanil-propofol admixture for induction of anaesthesia for canine radiotherapy and compare it to alfentanil-atropine followed by propofol induction in terms of heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), recovery duration and quality. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, masked, randomized clinical crossover trial. ANIMALS: A group of 40 client-owned dogs anaesthetized from October 2017 to June 2018. METHODS: Dogs were randomly assigned to be administered one of two protocols. For both protocols, IV preanaesthetic medication was given 30 seconds before rapid IV administration of a set volume of induction agent, with further induction agent administered as needed to permit intubation. For protocol ADMIX, the preanaesthetic medication was 0.04 mL kg0.9% sodium chloride and the induction agent was 0.2 mL kgpropofol-alfentanil admixture. For protocol ATRO, the preanaesthetic medication was 10 &#x3bc;g kgalfentanil with 12 &#x3bc;g kgatropine (0.04 mL kgtotal volume) and the induction agent was 0.2 mL kgpropofol. Anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane. Cardiorespiratory variables, agitation, hypotension, or inadequate depth of anaesthesia requiring supplemental boluses of propofol or increased vaporizer settings were recorded. Time to extubation, sternal recumbency and walking was noted. Videos were recorded for recovery quality scoring. Owner questionnaires gave feedback about recoveries at home. The other protocol was administered for the next radiotherapy session. RESULTS: The only significantly different variable between protocols was mean HR during anaesthesia, which was lower in ADMIX (p < 0.001). Hypotension was recorded in seven (17.5%) dogs in ATRO and three (7.5%) in ADMIX, with an association (p < 0.005) between ATRO and hypotension. Owners reported animals recovered 'normal' behaviour and appetite by the next morning. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both protocols were acceptable for dogs undergoing radiotherapy, with minimal differences in anaesthetic quality, recovery duration and quality. Although MAP did not differ overall, the incidence of hypotension was higher in ATRO.

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/31551138/