Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: David Mark Carpenter x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

Objective—To compare efficacy and safety of treatment with phenobarbital or bromide as the first-choice antiepileptic drug (AED) in dogs.

Design—Double-blinded, randomized, parallel, clinical trial.

Animals—46 AED-naïve dogs with naturally occurring epilepsy.

Procedures—Study inclusion was based on age, history, findings on physical and neurologic examinations, and clinicopathologic test results. For either phenobarbital treatment (21 dogs) or bromide treatment (25), a 7-day loading dose period was initiated along with a maintenance dose, which was adjusted on the basis of monthly monitoring. Efficacy and safety outcomes were compared between times (baseline and study end [generally 6 months]) and between drugs.

Results—Phenobarbital treatment resulted in eradication of seizures (17/20 [85%]) significantly more often than did bromide (12/23 [52%]); phenobarbital treatment also resulted in a greater percentage decrease in seizure duration (88 ± 34%), compared with bromide (49 ± 75%). Seizure activity worsened in 3 bromide-treated dogs only. In dogs with seizure eradication, mean ± SD serum phenobarbital concentration was 25 ± 6 μg/mL (phenobarbital dosage, 4.1 ± 1.1 mg/kg [1.9 ± 0.5 mg/lb], PO, q 12 h) and mean serum bromide concentration was 1.8 ± 0.6 mg/mL (bromide dosage, 31 ± 11 mg/kg [14 ± 5 mg/lb], PO, q 12 h). Ataxia, lethargy, and polydipsia were greater at 1 month for phenobarbital-treated dogs; vomiting was greater for bromide-treated dogs at 1 month and study end.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Both phenobarbital and bromide were reasonable first-choice AEDs for dogs, but phenobarbital was more effective and better tolerated during the first 6 months of treatment.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Objective

To estimate the marginal contribution of pasteurization of waste milk and colostrum to gross margin per calf at weaning and to estimate the minimum number of cattle on a dairy farm for pasteurization to be profitable.

Design

Randomized, controlled, clinical trial.

Animals

300 Holstein calves.

Procedure

The performance of calves fed pasteurized colostrum and waste milk was compared with the performance of calves fed nonpasteurized colostrum and waste milk. Costs, revenues, and gross margins for the 2 groups were compared.

Results

Calves fed pasteurized colostrum and waste milk were worth an extra $8.13 in gross margin/calf, compared with calves fed nonpasteurized colostrum and waste milk. The minimum number of cattle for which feeding pasteurized colostrum and waste milk was calculated to be economically feasible was 315 calves/d (1,260-cow dairy farm).

Clinical Implications

An economic benefit was associated with feeding pasteurized colostrum and waste milk. Additional benefits that may accrue include higher mean weight gain and lower mortality rate of calves as well as calves that have fewer days in which they are affected with diarrhea and pneumonia (J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;209:751–756)

Free access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association