Evaluation of a romifidine constant rate infusion protocol with or without butorphanol for dentistry and ophthalmologic procedures in standing horses. (17th May 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Marly, Charlotte; Bettschart‐Wolfensberger, Regula; Nussbaumer, Paeivi; Moine, Sebastien; Ringer, Simone K
• Is Part Of: Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia. Volume 41:Number 5(2014:Sep.)
• Page Start: 491
• Page End: 497
• Publication Date: 2014-05-17
• Subjects: Veterinary anesthesia -- Periodicals; 636.089
• DOI: 10.1111/vaa.12174
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1467-2987

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="vaa12174-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p>To compare the clinical usefulness of constant rate infusion (CRI) protocols of romifidine with or without butorphanol for sedation of horses.</p> </sec> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Study design</title> <p>Prospective 'blinded' controlled trial using block randomization.</p> </sec> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Animals</title> <p>Forty healthy Freiberger stallions.</p> </sec> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p>The horses received either intravenous (IV) romifidine (loading dose: 80 μg kg<sup>−1</sup>; infusion: 30 μg kg<sup>−1</sup> hour<sup>−1</sup>) (treatment R, <italic> n </italic>= 20) or romifidine combined with butorphanol (romifidine loading: 80 μg kg<sup>−1</sup>; infusion: 29 μg kg<sup>−1</sup> hour<sup>−1</sup>, and butorphanol loading: 18 μg kg<sup>−1</sup>; infusion: 25 μg kg<sup>−1</sup> hour<sup>−1</sup>) (treatment RB, <italic> n </italic>= 20). Twenty‐one horses underwent dentistry and ophthalmic procedures, while 19 horses underwent only ophthalmologic procedure and buccal examination. During the procedure, physiologic parameters and occurrence of head/muzzle shaking or twitching and forward movement were recorded. Whenever sedation was insufficient, additional romifidine (20 μg kg<sup>−1</sup>) was administered IV. Recovery time was evaluated by assessing head height above ground. At the end of the procedure, overall quality of sedation for the procedure was scored by the dentist and anaesthetist using a visual analogue scale. Statistical analyses used two‐way <sc>anova</sc> or linear mixed models as relevant.</p> </sec> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>Sedation quality scores as assessed by the anaesthetist were R: median 7.55, range: 4.9–9.0 cm, RB: 8.8, 4.7–10.0 cm, and by the dentist R: 6.6, 3.0–8.2 cm, RB: 7.9, 6.6–8.8 cm. Horses receiving RB showed clinically more effective sedation as demonstrated by fewer poor scores and a tendency to reduced additional drug requirements. More horses showed forward movement and head shaking in treatment RB than treatment R. Three horses (two RB, one R) had symptoms of colic following sedation.</p> </sec> <sec id="vaa12174-sec-0006" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions and clinical relevance</title> <p>The described protocols provide effective sedation under clinical conditions but for dentistry procedures, the addition of butorphanol is advantageous.</p> </sec> </abstract>