Comparison of two indirect techniques for local delivery of a high dose of an antimicrobial in the distal portion of forelimbs of horses

Jason A. Errico Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610.

Search for other papers by Jason A. Errico in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Troy N. Trumble Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610.

Search for other papers by Troy N. Trumble in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
,
Aloisio C. D. Bueno Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610.

Search for other papers by Aloisio C. D. Bueno in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MV, MS
,
Jennifer L. Davis Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by Jennifer L. Davis in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
, and
Murray P. Brown Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610.

Search for other papers by Murray P. Brown in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MSc

Abstract

Objective—To compare isolated limb retrograde venous injection (ILRVI) and isolated limb infusion (ILI) for delivery of amikacin to the synovial fluid of the distal interphalangeal and metacarpophalangeal joints and to evaluate the efficacy of use of an Esmarch tourniquet in standing horses.

Animals—6 healthy adult horses.

Procedures—Horses were randomly assigned in a crossover design. In ILRVI, the injection consisted of 1 g of amikacin diluted to a total volume of 60 mL administered during a 3-minute period. In ILI, the infusion consisted of 1 g of amikacin diluted to 40 mL administered during a 3-minute period followed by administration of boluses of diluent (82 mL total) to maintain vascular pressure. During ILI, the infusate and blood were circulated from the venous to the arterial circulation in 5-mL aliquots. Synovial fluid and serum samples were obtained to determine maximum amikacin concentrations and tourniquet leakage, respectively.

Results—Both techniques yielded synovial concentrations of amikacin > 10 times the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for 90% of isolates (80 μg/mL) and > 10 times the MIC breakpoint (160 μg/mL) of amikacin-susceptible bacteria reported to cause septic arthritis in horses. These values were attained for both joints for both techniques. Esmarch tourniquets prevented detectable loss of amikacin to the systemic circulation for both techniques.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Both techniques reliably achieved synovial fluid concentrations of amikacin consistent with concentration-dependent killing for bacteria commonly encountered in horses with septic arthritis. Esmarch tourniquets were effective for both delivery techniques in standing horses.

Abstract

Objective—To compare isolated limb retrograde venous injection (ILRVI) and isolated limb infusion (ILI) for delivery of amikacin to the synovial fluid of the distal interphalangeal and metacarpophalangeal joints and to evaluate the efficacy of use of an Esmarch tourniquet in standing horses.

Animals—6 healthy adult horses.

Procedures—Horses were randomly assigned in a crossover design. In ILRVI, the injection consisted of 1 g of amikacin diluted to a total volume of 60 mL administered during a 3-minute period. In ILI, the infusion consisted of 1 g of amikacin diluted to 40 mL administered during a 3-minute period followed by administration of boluses of diluent (82 mL total) to maintain vascular pressure. During ILI, the infusate and blood were circulated from the venous to the arterial circulation in 5-mL aliquots. Synovial fluid and serum samples were obtained to determine maximum amikacin concentrations and tourniquet leakage, respectively.

Results—Both techniques yielded synovial concentrations of amikacin > 10 times the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for 90% of isolates (80 μg/mL) and > 10 times the MIC breakpoint (160 μg/mL) of amikacin-susceptible bacteria reported to cause septic arthritis in horses. These values were attained for both joints for both techniques. Esmarch tourniquets prevented detectable loss of amikacin to the systemic circulation for both techniques.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Both techniques reliably achieved synovial fluid concentrations of amikacin consistent with concentration-dependent killing for bacteria commonly encountered in horses with septic arthritis. Esmarch tourniquets were effective for both delivery techniques in standing horses.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Trumble's present address is the Department of Veterinary Population Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.

Supported in part by the University of Florida Resident Research Grant Competition.

Presented in part at the Veterinary Orthopedic Conference, Sun Valley, Idaho, March 2007.

The authors thank Dr. Steeve Giguère for assistance with statistical analysis and Dr. Alison Morton for technical assistance. Address correspondence to Dr. Errico.

Address correspondence to Dr. Errico.
  • 1.

    Streppa HK, Singer MJ, Budsberg SC. Applications of local antimicrobial delivery systems in veterinary medicine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;219:4048.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Hanssen AD, Osmon DR, Patel R. Local antibiotic delivery systems: where are we and where are we going? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;437:111114.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Craig WA. Choosing an antibiotic on the basis of pharmacodynamics. Ear Nose Throat J 1998;77:711.

  • 4.

    Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis 1998;26:110.

  • 5.

    Stratton CW. Dead bugs don't mutate: susceptibility issues in the emergence of bacterial resistance. Emerg Infect Dis 2003;9:1016.

  • 6.

    Rubio-Martínez LM, Cruz AM. Antimicrobial regional limb perfusion in horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:706712.

  • 7.

    Whithair KJ, Bowersock TL, Blevins WE, et al. Regional limb perfusion for antibiotic treatment of experimentally induced septic arthritis. Vet Surg 1992;21:367373.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Santschi EM, Adams SB, Murphy ED. How to perform equine intravenous digital perfusion, in Proceedings. 44th Annu Meet Am Assoc Equine Pract 1998;198201.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Palmer SE, Hogan PM. How to perform regional limb perfusion in the standing horse, in Proceedings. 45th Annu Meet Am Assoc Equine Pract 1999;124127.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Whitehair KJ, Blevins WE, Fessler JF, et al. Regional perfusion of the equine carpus for antibiotic delivery. Vet Surg 1992;21:279285.

  • 11.

    Whitehair KJ, Adams SB, Parker JE, et al. Regional limb perfusion with antibiotics in three horses. Vet Surg 1992;21:286292.

  • 12.

    Murphey ED, Santschi EM, Papich MG. Regional intravenous perfusion of the distal limb of horses with amikacin sulfate. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1999;22:6871.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Butt TD, Bailey JV, Dowling PM, et al. Comparison of 2 techniques for regional antibiotic delivery to the equine forelimb: intraosseous perfusion vs. intravenous perfusion. Can Vet J 2001;42:617622.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Mattson S, Boure L, Pearce S, et al. Intraosseous gentamicin perfusion of the distal metacarpus in standing horse. Vet Surg 2004;33:180186.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Parra-Sanchez A, Lugo J, Boothe DM, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enrofloxacin and a low dose of amikacin administered via regional intravenous limb perfusion in standing horses. Am J Vet Res 2006;67:16871695.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Navarre CB, Zhang L, Sunkara G, et al. Ceftiofur distribution in plasma and joint fluid following regional limb injection in cattle. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1999;22:1319.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Gagnon H, Ferguson JG, Papich MG, et al. Single-dose pharmacokinetics of cefazolin in bovine synovial fluid after intravenous regional injection. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1994;17:3137.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Langer K, Seidler C, Partsch H. Ultrastructural study of the dermal microvasculature in patients undergoing retrograde intravenous pressure infusions. Dermatology 1996;192:103109.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Schaadt J, Crowley R, Miller D, et al. Isolated limb perfusion: a literature review. J Extra Corpor Technol 2002;34:130143.

  • 20.

    Ariyan S. Regional isolated perfusion of extremities for melanoma: now a 26-year experience with drugs other than L-phenylalanine mustard. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;111:12571261.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Fraser M, Marentay P, Bertha R. A collaborative approach to isolated limb perfusion. Aorn J 1999;70:642653.

  • 22.

    Thompson JF, Kam PC, Waugh RC, et al. Isolated limb infusion with cytotoxic agents: a simple alternative to isolated limb perfusion. Semin Surg Oncol 1998;14:238247.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Mian R, Henderson MA, Speakman D, et al. Isolated limb infusion for melanoma: a simple alternative to isolated limb perfusion. Can J Surg 2001;44:189192.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Bonenkamp JJ, Thompson JF, de Wilt JH, et al. Isolated limb infusion with fotemustine after dacarbazine chemosensitisation for inoperable loco-regional melanoma recurrence. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004;30:11071112.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Werner LA, Hardy J, Bertone AL. Bone gentamicin concentration after intra-articular injection or regional intravenous perfusion in the horse. Vet Surg 2003;32:559565.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Scheuch BC, Van Hoogmoed LM, Wilson WD, et al. Comparison of intraosseous or intravenous infusion for delivery of amikacin sulfate to the tibiotarsal joint of horses. Am J Vet Res 2002;63:374380.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Rubio-Martínez LM, López-Sanroman J, Cruz AM, et al. Evaluation of safety and pharmacokinetics of vancomycin after intravenous regional limb perfusion in horses. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:21072113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Adamson PJ, Wilson WD, Hirsh DC, et al. Susceptibility of equine bacterial isolates to antimicrobial agents. Am J Vet Res 1985;46:447450.

  • 29.

    Hirsh DC, Jang SS. Antimicrobic susceptibility of bacterial pathogens from horses. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1987;3:181190.

  • 30.

    NCCL standards. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. 4th ed. NCCLS document M7-A4. Wayne, Pa: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, 1997.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Schneider RK. Common bacteria encountered in septic arthritis, in Proceedings. 44th Annu Meet Am Assoc Equine Pract 1998;152158.

  • 32.

    Swanson T. Guide for veterinary service and judging of equestrian events. 3rd ed. Golden, Colo: American Association of Equine Practitioners, 1984.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Nicolau DP, Quintiliani R, Nightingale CH. Antibiotic kinetics and dynamics for the clinician. Med Clin North Am 1995;79:477495.

  • 34.

    Moore RD, Lietman PS, Smith CR. Clinical response to aminoglycoside therapy: importance of the ratio of peak concentration to minimal inhibitory concentration. J Infect Dis 1987;155:9399.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Anderson BH, Firth EC, Whittem T. The disposition of gentamicin in equine plasma, synovial fluid and lymph. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1995;18:124131.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Rubio-Martínez LM, López-Sanroman J, Cruz AM, et al. Evaluation of safety and pharmacokinetics of vancomycin after intraosseous regional limb perfusion and comparison of results with those obtained after intravenous regional limb perfusion in horses. Am J Vet Res 2006;67:17011707.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Grice SC, Morell RC, Balestrieri FJ, et al. Intravenous regional anesthesia: evaluation and prevention of leakage under the tourniquet. Anesthesiology 1986;65:316320.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    McLaren AC, Rorabeck CH. The pressure distribution under tourniquets. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985;67A:433438.

  • 39.

    Grebing BR, Coughlin MJ. Evaluation of the Esmark bandage as a tourniquet for forefoot surgery. Foot Ankle Int 2004;25:397405.

  • 40.

    Abraham E, Amirouche FML. Pressure controlled Esmarch bandage used as a tourniquet. Foot Ankle Int 2000;21:686689.

  • 41.

    Mattson SE, Pearce SG, Boure LP, et al. Comparison of intraosseous and intravenous infusion of technetium Tc 99m pertechnate in the distal portion of forelimbs in standing horses by use of scintigraphic imaging. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:12671272.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Kettner NU, Parker JE, Watrous BJ. Intraosseous regional perfusion for treatment of septic physitis in a two-week-old foal. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;222:346350.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Rubio-Martínez L, López-Sanroman J, Cruz AM, et al. Medullary plasma pharmacokinetics of vancomycin after intravenous and intraosseous perfusion of the proximal phalanx in horses. Vet Surg 2005;34:618624.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Gilleland LB, Gilleland HE, Gibson JA, et al. Adaptive resistance to aminoglycoside antibiotics in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Med Microbiol 1989;29:4150.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Begg EJ, Peddie BA, Chambers ST, et al. Comparison of gentamicin dosing regimens using an in-vitro model. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992;29:427433.

  • 46.

    Bryan LE, Van Den Elzen HM. Effects of membrane-energy mutations and cations on streptomycin and gentamicin accumulation by bacteria: a model for entry of streptomycin and gentamicin in susceptible and resistant bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1977;12:163177.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47.

    McGrath BJ, Lamp KC, Rybak MJ. Pharmacodynamic effects of extended dosing intervals of imipenem alone and in combination with amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an in vitro model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993;37:19311937.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48.

    Pille F, De Baere S, Ceelen L, et al. Synovial fluid and plasma concentrations of ceftiofur after regional intravenous perfusion in the horse. Vet Surg 2005;34:610617.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement