Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Andrew Phillips x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To establish reference intervals for radial joint orientation angles in the frontal and sagittal planes in small-breed dogs and to compare them to those previously reported for medium- and large-breed dogs.

ANIMALS

Antebrachii of 30 skeletally mature, nonchondrodystrophic small-breed dogs were evaluated radiographically.

PROCEDURES

Orthogonal radiographs were retrospectively assessed to determine the anatomic medial proximal radial angle, anatomic lateral distal radial angle, anatomic cranial proximal radial angle (aCrPRA), and anatomic caudal distal radial angle (aCdDRA). The frontal plane angle, θ angle, and procurvatum were also calculated. The radial joint orientation angles determined were compared to those previously reported for medium- and large-breed dogs via a 1-sample t test.

RESULTS

Mean and SD values for anatomic medial proximal radial angle, anatomic lateral distal radial angle, aCrPRA, and aCdDRA were 80.86 ± 2.86°, 85.60 ± 1.74°, 87.99 ± 2.79°, and 83.08 ± 3.14°, respectively. The mean and SDs for frontal plane angle, θ angle, and procurvatum were 4.75 ± 2.46°, 11.88 ± 1.76°, and 16.79 ± 4.13°, respectively. aCrPRA and aCdDRA were significantly different when compared to previously reported radial joint angles for medium- and large-breed dogs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Reference intervals for small-breed dog radial joint orientation angles were reported. Significant differences were identified for some joint orientation angles when compared to medium- and large-breed dogs. This small-breed reference interval reported can be utilized in planning of radial angular limb deformity corrective surgery, particularly when dogs are bilaterally affected.

Restricted access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

Objective—To develop a dosage correlated with shoulder height (SH) in centimeters for effective immobilization of free-ranging giraffes, using a combination of medetomidine (MED) and ketamine (KET) and reversal with atipamezole (ATP)

Design—Prospective study.

Animals—23 free-ranging giraffes.

Procedure—The drug combination (MED and KET) was administered by use of a projectile dart. Quality of induction, quality of immobilization, and time to recovery following injection of ATP were evaluated. Physiologic variables measured during immobilization included PaO2, PaCO2, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, blood pH, indirect arterial blood pressure, heart and respiratory rates, and rectal temperature.

Results—Sixteen giraffes became recumbent with a dosage (mean ± SD) of 143 ± 29 µg of MED and 2.7 ± 0.6 mg of KET/cm of SH. Initially, giraffes were atactic and progressed to lateral recumbency. Three giraffes required casting with ropes for data collection, with dosages of 166 ± 5 µg of MED and 3.2 ± 0.6 mg of KET/cm of SH. Four giraffes required administration of etorphine (n = 2) or were cast with ropes (2) for capture but remained dangerous to personnel once recumbent, precluding data collection. In giraffes successfully immobilized, physiologic monitoring revealed hypoxia and increased respiratory rates. Values for PaCO2, end-tidal CO2, and heart rate remained within reference ranges. All giraffes were hypertensive and had a slight increase in rectal temperature. Atipamezole was administered at 340 ± 20 µg/cm of SH, resulting in rapid and smooth recoveries.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Medetomidine and KET was an effective immobilizing combination for free-ranging giraffes; however, at the dosages used, it does not induce adequate analgesia for major manipulative procedures. Quality of induction and immobilization were enhanced if the giraffe was calm. Reversal was rapid and complete following injection of ATP. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;218:245–249)

Restricted access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association