OBJECTIVE To evaluate agreement between observers with different training and experience for assessment of postoperative pain and sedation in cats by use of a dynamic and interactive visual analog scale (DIVAS) and for assessment of postoperative pain in the same cats with a multidimensional composite pain scale (MCPS).
PROCEDURES Cats received 1 of 3 preoperative treatments: bupivacaine, IP; meloxicam, SC with saline (0.9% NaCl) solution, IP, (positive control); or saline solution only, IP (negative control). All cats received premedication with buprenorphine prior to general anesthesia. An experienced observer (observer 1; male; native language, Spanish) used scales in English, and an inexperienced observer (observer 2; female; native language, French) used scales in French to assess signs of sedation and pain. Rescue analgesia was administered according to MCPS scoring by observer 1. Mean pain and sedation scores per treatment and time point, proportions of cats in each group with MCPS scores necessitating rescue analgesia, and mean MCPS scores assigned at the time of rescue analgesia were compared between observers. Agreement was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient determination. Percentage disagreement between observers on the need for rescue analgesia was calculated.
RESULTS Interobserver agreements for pain scores were good, and that for sedation scores was fair. On the basis of observer 1's MCPS scores, a greater proportion of cats in the negative control group received rescue analgesia than in the bupivacaine or positive control groups. Scores from observer 2 indicated a greater proportion of cats in the negative control group than in the positive control group required rescue analgesia but identified no significant difference between the negative control and bupivacaine groups for this variable. Overall, disagreement regarding need for rescue analgesia was identified for 22 of 360 (6.1%) paired observations.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Interobserver differences in assessing pain can lead to different conclusions regarding treatment effectiveness.
Procedures—Cats were premedicated with acepromazine and morphine; anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Cats were given constant rate infusions of remifentanil (20 μg/kg/h [9 μg/lb/h], IV; n = 8), remifentanil and ketamine (0.5 mg/kg [0.23 mg/lb], then 1.8 mg/kg/h [0.82 mg/lb/h], IV; 7), or crystalloid fluids (8). The anesthesiologist was blinded to treatment group, end-tidal isoflurane concentration, and vaporizer setting. Heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, respiratory rate, end-tidal partial pressure of CO2, temperature, and end-tidal isoflurane concentration were monitored; recovery scores were assigned.
Results—There were no significant differences among treatment groups with respect to age, body weight, surgery time, anesthesia time, time to extubation, recovery score, or cardiorespiratory variables. End-tidal isoflurane concentration was significantly reduced in cats given remifentanil and ketamine (mean ± SD, 0.63 ± 0.4%), compared with concentration in cats given crystalloid fluids (1.22 ± 0.5%) but not compared with concentration in cats given remifentanil alone (1.03 ± 0.4%). Compared with cats given crystalloid fluids, mean isoflurane requirement was reduced by 48.3% in cats given remifentanil-ketamine and 15.6% in cats given remifentanil alone.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—At the dosages administered, a constant rate infusion of remifentanil-ketamine resulted in a significant decrease in the isoflurane requirement in healthy cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy. However, significant differences in cardiovascular variables were not observed among treatment groups.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate pharmacokinetics of bupivacaine after IP administration to cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
ANIMALS 8 healthy cats.
PROCEDURES Anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. Buprenorphine (0.02 mg/kg, IV) and meloxicam (0.2 mg/kg, SC) were administered. A 20-gauge catheter was inserted into a jugular vein for blood sample collection. A ventral midline incision was made, and a solution of 0.5% bupivacaine (2 mg/kg) diluted with an equal volume of saline (0.9% NaCl) solution (final concentration, 0.25% bupivacaine) was injected into the peritoneal space over the right and left ovarian pedicles and caudal aspect of the uterus before ovariohysterectomy. Cats were monitored for signs of bupivacaine toxicosis. Venous blood samples (2 mL) were collected before (time 0) and 2, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 60, 120, and 240 minutes after bupivacaine administration. Plasma bupivacaine concentrations were determined with a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by data plotting followed by analysis with a noncompartmental model.
RESULTS No signs of bupivacaine toxicosis were observed. Maximum bupivacaine plasma concentration was 1,030 ± 497.5 ng/mL at a mean ± SD value of 30 ± 24 minutes after administration. Mean elimination half-life was 4.79 ± 2.7 hours. Mean clearance indexed by bioavailability and volume of distribution indexed by bioavailability were 0.35 ± 0.18 L•h/kg and 2.10 ± 0.84 L/kg, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Intraperitoneal administration of bupivacaine resulted in concentrations that did not cause observable toxicosis. Studies to investigate analgesic effects for this technique in cats are warranted.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate antinociceptive effects of IV administration of hydromorphone alone or followed by buprenorphine or butorphanol to cats.
ANIMALS 6 healthy adult cats.
PROCEDURES In a randomized, blinded crossover design, cats received each of 4 treatments in which 2 IV injections were given 30 minutes apart: 2 of saline (0.9% NaCl) solution (Sal-Sal) or 1 each of hydromorphone HCl and saline solution (H-Sal), hydromorphone and buprenorphine HCl (H-Bupre), or hydromorphone and butorphanol tartrate (H-Butor). Skin temperature and thermal threshold were recorded before (baseline) and for 12 hours after the first injection. Percentage of maximum possible effect (%MPE) and thermal excursion (TE) were compared among treatments and measurement points.
RESULTS Compared with baseline values, skin temperature was higher from 0.75 to 2 hours after the first injection for H-Sal; at 0.5, 1, 3, and 4 hours for H-Bupre; from 0.5 to 3 hours for H-Butor; and from 0.5 to 1 hours for Sal-Sal. Thermal excursion was higher than at baseline from 0.25 to 2 hours for H-Sal and H-Bupre and 0.25 to 0.75 hours for H-Butor; %MPE increased from 0.25 to 2 hours for H-Sal, 0.25 to 3 hours for H-Bupre, and 0.25 to 0.75 hours for H-Butor. Results were similar for comparisons with Sal-Sal, except TE was greater for H-Sal versus Sal-Sal and TE and %MPE were greater for H-Bupre versus Sal-Sal from 0.25 to 1 hours after the first injection.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Butorphanol administration decreased the duration of antinociception achieved with hydromorphone administration in cats. This opioid interaction and its impact on pain management require additional investigation.