Presence of the identified risk factors should warrant aggressive treatment. Lidocaine treatment was not associated with mortality rate or postoperative complications, but was associated with prolonged hospitalization time.
Summary
An 18‐year‐old Arabian‐mix mare was presented with a history of severe colic. Emergency exploratory celiotomy revealed diaphragmatic hernia, with a large rent in the left dorsal aspect of the diaphragm and large colon volvulus. Attempts to close the defect in the diaphragm in dorsal recumbency were unsuccessful. Therefore, a thoracic approach through lateral thoracotomy was elected, and a mesh was attached to the diaphragm using skin staples. While in dorsal recumbency, the mare suffered from significant respiratory acidosis. Thus, the mare was tilted into reverse Trendelenburg (30° head upward) and ventilation improved markedly. The mare recovered uneventfully, and was doing well 5 years after surgery.
Twenty-two free-ranging golden jackals (Canis aureus) were immobilized with a combination of 113 +/- 24 microg/kg medetomidine and 2.1 +/- 0.3 mg/kg ketamine (M-K) or 88 +/- 16 microg/kg medetomidine and 0.47 +/- 0.08 mg/ kg midazolam (M-M) by i.m. injection. Induction and recovery times were recorded. Pulse rate, respiratory rate, body temperature, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, and oxygen saturation were measured. Anesthesia depth indicators were observed. There was no significant difference between the M-K and the M-M groups regarding induction time (6:14 +/- 1:45 and 7:16 +/- 2:09 min, respectively). Both combinations provided safe and effective immobilization for at least 20-30 min. Pulse rate was significantly higher in the M-K group. There was no significant difference in any other objective or subjective parameter. Following administration of atipamezole at five times the dose of medetomidine given, there was a significant difference between the two combinations in recovery time; M-K jackals were standing within 3:42 +/- 2:17 min and M-M jackals within 8:47 +/- 4:32 min. Neither of the combinations caused rough or prolonged recovery. Subjectively, the M-M group had smoother and less ataxic recovery.
Thirty-two free-ranging red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) were immobilized with one of three combinations: medetomidine (0.076 +/- 0.017 mg/kg) and ketamine (2.1 +/- 0.5 mg/kg; MK, n = 16), medetomidine (0.057 +/- 0.008 mg/kg) and low-dose midazolam (0.6 +/- 0.1 mg/kg; MM-0.5, n = 10), or medetomidine (0.067 +/- 0.012 mg/kg) and high-dose midazolam (1.3 +/- 0.2 mg/kg; MM-1, n = 6) by i.m. injection. Induction and recovery times were recorded. Pulse, respiratory rate, body temperature, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and oxygen saturation were measured. Anesthesia depth indicators were observed. There was a significant difference between the MM-0.5 and the MM-1 groups regarding induction time, 8.1 +/- 2.1 min and 5.0 +/- 1.7 min, respectively. The MK induction time was 6.9 +/- 2.5 min, which was not significantly different from the other two groups. All combinations provided effective immobilization for at least 20-25 min. During immobilization, there were significant differences regarding rectal temperature, which was higher in the MK group; and blood pressure, which was higher in the MM-1 group. After administration of atipamezole at 5 mg per 1 mg medetomidine given, there was a significant difference between the groups in recovery time; MK foxes were standing within 3.9 +/- 1.7 min, MM-0.5 foxes within 10.6 +/- 4.5 min, and MM-1 foxes within 10.2 +/- 3.4 min. None of the combinations caused rough or prolonged recoveries. Subjectively, the MM groups had smoother and less ataxic recoveries than the MK group. In conclusion, the authors recommend the use of medetomidine at 0.07 mg/kg in combination with midazolam at 0.8 mg/kg or ketamine at 2 mg/kg for the immobilization of free-ranging red foxes. During immobilization, monitoring of body temperature and oxygenation is recommended.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.