Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Maropitant lowers anesthesia needs and nausea after dog spay surgery
By Swallow, Adam et al.·Published in Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia·2017·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: The effect of maropitant on intraoperative isoflurane requirements and postoperative nausea and vomiting in dogs: a randomized clinical trial.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 24 healthy dogs undergoing routine spay surgery were given either a medication called maropitant or a saline solution before anesthesia to see if it would help reduce the amount of anesthesia needed and prevent nausea after surgery. The results showed that the dogs who received maropitant needed less anesthesia during the procedure, but it did not significantly lower the chances of experiencing nausea and vomiting afterward. Overall, while maropitant helped reduce the amount of anesthesia used, it didn't seem to make a difference in post-surgery nausea for these dogs.
People also search for: dog spay surgery nausea · maropitant for dogs · anesthesia requirements in dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish if preoperative maropitant significantly reduced intraoperative isoflurane requirements and reduced clinical signs associated with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. ANIMALS: Twenty-four healthy, client-owned dogs undergoing routine ovariohysterectomy. METHODS: Premedication involved acepromazine (0.03 mg kg) combined with methadone (0.3 mg kg) intramuscularly 45 minutes before anaesthetic induction with intravenous (IV) propofol, dosed to effect. Meloxicam (0.2 mg kg) was administered intravenously. Dogs were randomly assigned to administration of saline (group S; 0.1 mL kg, n=12) or maropitant (group M; 1 mg kg, n=12) subcutaneously at time of premedication. Methadone (0.1 mg kgIV) was repeated 4 hours later. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen, dosed to effect by an observer unaware of group allocation. The dogs were assessed hourly, starting 1 hour postoperatively, using the short form of the Glasgow Composite Pain Score (GCPS), and for ptyalism and signs attributable to PONV [score from 0 (none) to 3 (severe)] by blinded observers. Owners completed a questionnaire at the postoperative recheck. RESULTS: Overall mean±standard deviation end-tidal isoflurane percentage was lower in group M (1.19±0.26%) than group S (1.44±0.23%) (p=0.022), but was not significantly different between groups at specific noxious events (skin incision, ovarian pedicle clamp application, cervical clamp application, wound closure). Cardiorespiratory variables and postoperative GCPS were not significantly different between groups. Overall, 50% of dogs displayed signs attributable to PONV, with no difference in PONV scores between groups (p=0.198). No difference in anaesthetic recovery was noted by owners between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Maropitant reduced overall intraoperative isoflurane requirements but did not affect the incidence of PONV. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Maropitant provided no significant benefits to dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy with this anaesthetic and analgesic protocol, although clinically significant reductions in isoflurane requirements were noted.
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/28844293/