Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Kate M. Bailey x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search


OBJECTIVE To evaluate quality of recovery from general anesthesia in horses after induction with propofol and ketamine versus midazolam and ketamine.

DESIGN Prospective randomized crossover study.

ANIMALS 6 healthy adult horses.

PROCEDURES Horses were premedicated with xylazine (1.0 mg/kg [0.45 mg/lb], IV), and general anesthesia was induced with midazolam (0.1 mg/kg [0.045 mg/lb], IV) or propofol (0.5 mg/kg [0.23 mg/lb], IV), followed by ketamine (3.0 mg/kg [1.36 mg/lb], IV). Horses were endotracheally intubated, and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane. After 60 minutes, horses were given romifidine (0.02 mg/kg [0.009 mg/lb], IV) and allowed to recover unassisted. Times to first movement, sternal recumbency, and standing and the number of attempts to stand were recorded. Plasma concentrations of propofol or midazolam were measured following induction and immediately before recovery. Recovery quality was scored by 3 graders with a recovery rubric and a visual analog scale.

RESULTS Number of attempts to stand was significantly lower when horses received propofol (median, 2; range, 1 to 3) than when they received midazolam (median, 7.5; range, 3 to 16). For both the recovery rubric and visual analog scale, recovery quality was significantly better when horses received propofol than when they received midazolam. Plasma drug concentration at recovery, as a percentage of the concentration at induction, was significantly lower when horses received propofol than when they received midazolam.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results suggested that for horses undergoing short (ie, 60 minutes) periods of general anesthesia, recovery quality may be better following induction with propofol and ketamine, compared with midazolam and ketamine.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association


Objective—To determine efficacy of propofol as an immersion agent to induce general anesthesia in koi (Cyprinus carpio).

Design—Prospective, crossover study.

Animals—10 adult koi (mean ± SD weight, 325 ± 81 g).

Procedures—Koi were exposed to each of 4 concentrations of propofol (1, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg/L) with a 1-week washout period between trials. In a subsequent trial, koi were anesthetized with propofol (5 mg/L) and anesthesia was maintained with propofol (3 mg/L) for 20 minutes. Response to a noxious stimulus was assessed by means of needle insertion into an epaxial muscle.

Results—At a propofol concentration of 1 mg/L, koi were sedated but never anesthetized. At propofol concentrations of 2.5, 5, and 10 mg/L, mean ± SD anesthetic induction times were 13.4 ± 3.3, 3.8 ± 1.1, and 2.3 ± 0.9 minutes, respectively; mean recovery times were 12.9 ± 8.3, 11.0 ± 6.3, and 18.1 ± 13.0 minutes; mean heart rates were 57 ± 25, 30 ± 14, and 22 ± 14 beats/min; mean opercular rates were 58 ± 18, 68 ± 15, and 48 ± 22 beats/min; and 1 of 10, 2 of 10, and 0 of 10 fish responded to needle insertion. All fish recovered satisfactorily. Following 20 minutes of anesthesia, 2 fish had recovery times > 4 hours and 1 fish died.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Immersion in propofol at concentrations ≥ 2.5 mg/L induced general anesthesia in koi. Maintenance of anesthesia with propofol for 20 minutes was associated with prolonged recovery times in 2 of 9 and death in 1 of 9 koi.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association


Objective—To determine whether repeated exposure to clinically relevant concentrations of tricaine methanesulfonate (MS-222) would alter retinal function or induce histologically detectable retinal lesions in koi carp (Cyprinus carpio).

Design—Prospective, controlled, experimental study.

Animals—18 healthy koi carp.

Procedures—2 fish were euthanized at the start of the study, and eyes were submitted for histologic evaluation as untreated controls. Anesthesia was induced in the remaining fish with 200 mg of MS-222/L and maintained with concentrations of 125 to 150 mg/L for a total exposure time of 20 minutes daily on 1 to 13 consecutive days. On days 1, 7, and 13, electroretinography of both eyes was performed in all fish remaining in the study, and 2 fish were euthanized immediately after each procedure for histologic evaluation of the eyes. Median b-wave amplitudes were compared among study days for right eyes and for left eyes via 1-way repeated-measures ANOVA with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.

Results—Median b-wave amplitudes on days 1, 7, and 13 were 17.7, 20.9, and 17.6 μV, respectively, for right eyes and 15.1, 16.9, and 14.3 μV, respectively, for left eyes. No significant differences in b-wave amplitudes were detected among study days. No histopathologic abnormalities were identified in the retinas of any fish treated with MS-222 or in control fish.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Short-term exposure of koi carp to clinically relevant concentrations of MS-222 daily for up to 13 days was not associated with changes in retinal structure or function as measured in this study.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association