No abstract

Use of an accelerometer was adequate for at-home activity monitoring, an important end point in clinical trials of treatment for chronic disease, and provided information about daily activity that is unattainable by other methods.

Background: The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is activated in states of decreased cardiac output and by certain cardiovascular therapeutic agents, such as loop diuretics and vasodilators.Hypothesis: Short-term treatment with the inodilator, pimobendan, will not activate the circulating RAAS because its vasodilatory action will be offset by its positive inotropic property, thereby ameliorating RAAS stimulation at the juxtaglomerular apparatus. Furthermore, pimobendan will suppress RAAS activation produced by furosemide.Animals: Nine healthy laboratory dogs were used in this study. Methods: Experimental, cross-over study. Dogs were administered pimobendan (0.5 mg/kg q12h) for 4 days followed by furosemide (2 mg/kg q12h) and then, after a wash-out period, a combination of the drugs. Aldosterone : creatinine (A : Cr) was measured at the end of each treatment cycle.Results: There was no significant increase in the average urinary A : Cr with the administration of pimobendan (control urinary A : Cr 5 0.46, standard deviation (SD) 0.33; pimobendan A : Cr 5 0.48, SD 0.28). There was a significant increase in the average urinary A : Cr after administration of furosemide (urinary A : Cr 5 1.3, SD 0.70) and with the combination of furosemide and pimobendan (urinary A : Cr 5 2.9, SD 1.6).Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Short-term administration of high-dose pimobendan, does not activate the RAAS in healthy dogs. Pimobendan did not prevent RAAS activation associated with furosemide therapy. These results in healthy dogs suggest that furosemide therapy, with or without pimobendan, should be accompanied by RAAS suppressive therapy.

Results did not provide any evidence of an association between bacterial endocarditis in dogs and either dental or oral surgical procedures or oral infection. Findings suggested that the routine use of prophylactic antimicrobial administration in dogs undergoing oral procedures needs to be reevaluated.

No abstract