Abstract
Objective
This study investigated whether preoperative methadone provided superior perioperative analgesia compared to buprenorphine in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
Methods
Eighty female dogs were recruited to an assessor-blinded, randomised, clinical trial. Dogs received a premedication of 0.05 mg/kg acepromazine or 10 µg/kg medetomidine combined with either 0.3 mg/kg methadone or 20 µg/kg buprenorphine intramuscularly. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Pain was assessed using a dynamic interactive visual analogue (DIVASpain) and short form of the Glasgow Composite Pain (SF-GCPS) scale. Assessments were completed prior to premedication, 30 minutes later
and every hour for eight hours after premedication. If indicated by the SF-GCPS, rescue analgesia was provided with methadone. If rescue analgesia was not given within 5 hours of premedication, a second dose of test opioid was administered. Meloxicam was administered after the last assessment. The area under curve for change in SF-GCPS and DIVASpain score over time were compared using a General Linear Model (GLM) and requirement for rescue analgesia was compared using a Chi-squared test. Data are presented as mean ± SEM or SD or median ± range (maximum-minimum) as appropriate.
Results
Both groups premedicated with buprenorphine had significantly higher SF-GCPS and DIVASpain scores over time than those premedicated with methadone. There was no interaction between opioid and sedative for any outcome measure. Rescue analgesia was required by significantly more dogs premedicated with buprenorphine (45%) compared to methadone (20%) (p = 0.017). Clinical significance At the doses investigated methadone produced superior postoperative analgesia compared to buprenorphine in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
This study investigated whether preoperative methadone provided superior perioperative analgesia compared to buprenorphine in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
Methods
Eighty female dogs were recruited to an assessor-blinded, randomised, clinical trial. Dogs received a premedication of 0.05 mg/kg acepromazine or 10 µg/kg medetomidine combined with either 0.3 mg/kg methadone or 20 µg/kg buprenorphine intramuscularly. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Pain was assessed using a dynamic interactive visual analogue (DIVASpain) and short form of the Glasgow Composite Pain (SF-GCPS) scale. Assessments were completed prior to premedication, 30 minutes later
and every hour for eight hours after premedication. If indicated by the SF-GCPS, rescue analgesia was provided with methadone. If rescue analgesia was not given within 5 hours of premedication, a second dose of test opioid was administered. Meloxicam was administered after the last assessment. The area under curve for change in SF-GCPS and DIVASpain score over time were compared using a General Linear Model (GLM) and requirement for rescue analgesia was compared using a Chi-squared test. Data are presented as mean ± SEM or SD or median ± range (maximum-minimum) as appropriate.
Results
Both groups premedicated with buprenorphine had significantly higher SF-GCPS and DIVASpain scores over time than those premedicated with methadone. There was no interaction between opioid and sedative for any outcome measure. Rescue analgesia was required by significantly more dogs premedicated with buprenorphine (45%) compared to methadone (20%) (p = 0.017). Clinical significance At the doses investigated methadone produced superior postoperative analgesia compared to buprenorphine in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 539-546 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Journal of Small Animal Practice |
| Volume | 59 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| Early online date | 21 May 2018 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2018 |