Mechanics of breathing in goats

Bakima, M.; Gustin, Pascal; Lekeux, Pierre; Lomba, F.

doi:10.1016/s0034-5288(18)30960-3

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, our overall mean ± s.d. minute volumes were 8.5 L/min ± 4.0 L/min and were similar to etorphine-immobilised impalas (10.9 L/min; mean body weight 36 kg; Meyer et al 2010 ) and those of small domestic ruminants (6.3 L/min – 10.4 L/min: Bakima et al 1988 ; Hales & Webster 1967 ). Despite the adequate respiratory rates and minute volume, hypoxaemia and hypercapnia were observed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Comparison of thiafentanil-medetomidine to etorphine-medetomidine immobilisation of impalas (<i>Aepyceros melampus</i>)

Zeiler

Meyer

2017

J. S. Afr. Vet. Assoc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impalas (Aepyceros melampus) are increasingly valuable in the South African wildlife industry, and there is a greater need to chemically immobilise them, ideally with minimal risk. This study aimed to compare the times to recumbency and physiological effects of thiafentanil-medetomidine versus etorphine-medetomidine immobilisation. A combination of thiafentanil (2 mg) + medetomidine (2.2 mg) and etorphine (2 mg) + medetomidine (2.2 mg) was administered (to nine impalas; crossover design) via a dart. After darting, a stopwatch was started to record times to recumbency (time from darting until recumbent without attempts to stand). If apnoea was present, the impalas received one or more boluses of butorphanol (1:1 potent opioid dose). Data collection included arterial blood gas analysis and the number of butorphanol boluses. Two-sample t-tests were used to compare differences between combinations. The time to recumbency for thiafentanil-medetomidine was 12.2 (± 6.8) min and no different from 14.5 (± 5.2) min for etorphine-medetomidine (p = 0.426). The thiafentanil-medetomidine combination required more butorphanol boluses (median: 2; interquartile range: 2–3) compared to etorphine-medetomidine (median: 0; interquartile range: 0–1) (p = 0.001). Despite butorphanol treatment and resolution of apnoea, all impalas suffered hypoxaemia (PaO2 ± 44.0 mmHg). Thiafentanil-medetomidine did not immobilise impalas more rapidly than etorphine-medetomidine, and resulted in more apnoea that required rescue butorphanol boluses. Marked hypoxaemia resulted from both combinations, mainly because of right-to-left intrapulmonary shunting and not because of hypoventilation. Butorphanol and oxygen supplementation should be considered as essential rescue interventions for all impalas immobilised with these potent opioid combinations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%