Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Sedation and heart effects of dexmedetomidine given in nose or muscle
By Liu, Zhaoyi et al.·Published in Journal of feline medicine and surgery·2025·Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, China·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Sedative and echocardiographic effects of intranasal or intramuscular administration of dexmedetomidine in healthy cats.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of eight healthy adult cats received a sedative called dexmedetomidine either through their nose or by injection to see which method worked better. Both methods made the cats more relaxed, but the intranasal (IN) route caused less vomiting and had fewer side effects compared to the intramuscular (IM) injection. While both methods reduced heart function, the IN method was just as effective for sedation and pain tolerance without the same level of adverse reactions. This suggests that using dexmedetomidine through the nose could be a safer option for sedating cats.
People also search for: cat sedation options · dexmedetomidine side effects in cats · how to sedate a cat for vet visit
Abstract
ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the sedative and echocardiographic effects of dexmedetomidine (DEX) administered via intranasal (IN) and intramuscular (IM) routes in cats.MethodsThis randomised, blinded crossover study involved eight healthy adult cats. Cats were randomly allocated to receive DEX 10 μg/kg via either the IN or IM routes. Sedation, mechanical nociception and muscle relaxation were subjectively assessed and physiological variables recorded at baseline and at 5 min intervals for up to 40 mins after drug delivery. Echocardiography was performed 15 mins after delivery.ResultsIn both treatment groups, sedation assessment scores significantly increased compared with baseline values ( <0.05). At 25-35 mins after delivery, only the IN group exhibited a significant decrease in mechanical nociception scores compared with baseline ( = 0.041, = 0.042, = 0.026). DEX delivery via both routes resulted in significant reductions in pulse rate (<0.05). In the IM group, mean arterial blood pressure measurements 35-40 mins after delivery were significantly lower than baseline ( = 0.012, = 0.012). Fractional shortening significantly decreased in both the IN and IM groups compared with baseline ( = 0.016 and = 0.049, respectively). Both routes caused reductions in cardiac systolic function, with no significant difference between the two routes. Vomiting occurred in half of the IN group (4/8) and in all cats of the IM group (8/8), with a significantly lower incidence in the IN group ( = 0.046).Conclusions and relevanceIN delivery of-DEX provided comparable sedation, increased tolerance to mechanical nociception and muscle relaxation effects while causing fewer adverse effects than IM-DEX. Both routes similarly reduced cardiac contractile function. Thus, IN-DEX at a dose of 10 μg/kg is a viable alternative to IM-DEX for sedation in healthy cats.
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/40905275/