Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with propofol-fentanyl and propofol-midazolam combinations in spontaneously-breathing goats

Abstract

Objective To compare the efficacy and cardiopulmonary effects of propofol and fentanyl, with propofol and midazolam for total intravenous anaesthesia.Study Design Prospective, randomized, crossover experimental study.Animals Six healthy goats; 3 does and 3 wethers. ). MethodsCardiopulmonary function was well maintained with both treatments. Recovery times in minutes from the end of anaesthetic infusion for treatments FP and MP respectively were; to extubation 3.0 (3.0-3.0) and 4.5 (3.3-5.0); to sternal position, 4.5 (3.3-5.0) and 5.0 (5.0-6.5) and to standing 13.0 (10.3-15.0) and 15.0 (11.3-17.3). Quality of recovery was acceptable in both groups, but abnormal behavioural signs were observed after treatment FP. Conclusions and clinical relevanceTotal intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl or propofol and midazolam, at the doses studied, in spontaneously-breathing, oxygen-supplemented goats is practicable. Recovery from the fentanyl-propofol combination is not always smooth.

Bispectral index assessment in calves subjected to the continuous infusion of propofol combined with fentanyl administration

“…Thus, the drug chosen was fentanyl, using an infusion rate of 0.001mg kg -1 hour -1 as indicated by TRANQUILLI et al (2007). After beginning the infusion, the HR increased significantly in both groups, remaining high throughout the infusion period, which was in contrast to the findings by DZIKITI et al (2010), who observed no increase in HR when using propofol and fentanyl or midazolam infusion in goats. A possibility accounting for such a difference might be related to the higher infusion rate (12mg kg -1 hour -1 and 0.02mg kg -1 hour -1 ) of drugs (propofol and fentanyl, respectively) used in the aforementioned study, which mediated a decrease in HR during the infusion, albeit without statistically, significant differences.…”

“…Conversely, the values reported during the infusion period corroborated with those of: GUERRERO & NUNES, (2003) The G F prolonged recovery times when the animal was positioned in both sternal recumbency and in a standing position, revealing significant differences between the groups only during the SP time. These results go against the findings reported by DZIKITI et al (2010), who observed no significant differences in the recovery time when combining propofol infusion with the adjunctive administration of midazolam or fentanyl in goats. Those authors also reported that goats from the fentanyl group showed signs of disparate behavior at the time of recovery, displaying unrest, which was also observed in the present study in the animals in group G F .…”

“…However, the severity of these effects were less intense and were restricted to chewing movements. Nonetheless, we believed that the incidence of adverse effects during recovery could be similar to those observed by DZIKITI et al (2010) in goats if the infusion rate of fentanyl was increased.…”

“…These results can be explained by the fact that all animals were restrained at baseline. DZIKITI et al (2010) also observed significant differences between T B and the other time points, which were assessed when infusing propofol combined with fentanyl in goats. However, that difference was much steeper, with f values of approximately 7 respiratory movements per minute, without requiring the use of mechanical ventilation.…”

Cardiorespiratory and Hemodynamic Effects of Medetomidine or Xylazine with Atropine and Diazepam Premedication for Total Intravenous Anesthesia Induced and Maintained with Propofol/Fentanyl in Dogs Undergoing Surgery

“…of anesthesia but their dogs were premedicated with intramuscular acepromazine (up to 0.5 mg/kg) and subcutaneous carprofene (4 mg/kg) administration. Dzikiti et al [20] found that a propofol/fentanyl infusion for 90 min. did not require assisted respiration, but recovery was not always smooth in goats.…”