Objective—To assess efficacy and tolerability of robenacoxib for control of pain and inflammation in dogs undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Animals—140 client-owned dogs.
Procedures—A multicenter, prospective, randomized, blinded field trial was conducted to compare robenacoxib (97 dogs) and meloxicam (43 dogs). After randomization, each dog received an initial dose (robenacoxib, 2 mg/kg; meloxicam, 0.2 mg/kg) via SC injection before surgery and daily doses (robenacoxib, 1 to 2 mg/kg; meloxicam, 0.1 mg/kg) administered orally for up to 15 days after surgery. Efficacy was assessed by veterinarians and owners via numeric rating scales and visual analogue scales. Safety was assessed on the basis of reported adverse events, clinical signs, results of hematologic and biochemical analyses, and buccal mucosa bleeding times.
Results—Treatment groups were balanced with respect to baseline and demographic data. Both treatments provided similar adequate pain control, as assessed with a modified Glasgow pain scale as the primary end point and supported by secondary end points in evaluations conducted by veterinarians and owners. For the primary end point, the ratio of the reciprocal of the scores for robenacoxib to meloxicam was 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.98 to 1.37). No dogs required rescue analgesia. Both treatments were associated with only minor adverse events, which were not necessarily related to the administered treatments and did not affect mucosal bleeding times.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Robenacoxib provided efficacy and tolerability similar to those of meloxicam for the management of perioperative pain and inflammation in dogs undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Objective—To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of oral administration of robenacoxib for treatment of acute pain and inflammation associated with musculoskeletal disorders in cats.
Animals—155 cats requiring relief of signs of pain and inflammation associated with acute musculoskeletal disorders.
Procedures—The study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, masked, noninferiority field trial. Cats were allocated randomly to 1 of 3 treatment groups: group 1 (1.0 to 2.4 mg of robenacoxib/kg, q 24 h), group 2 (1.0 to 2.4 mg of robenacoxib/kg, q 12 h [daily dosage, 2.0 to 4.8 mg/kg]), and group 3 (ketoprofen [mean dosage, 1 mg/kg, q 24 h]). All cats were administered tablets PO for 5 or 6 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the investigator global assessment score, which was the sum of scores of signs of pain, inflammation, and mobility assessed in a masked manner by veterinary investigators at baseline, day 2, and day 4 or 5. Cat owners monitored in a nonmasked manner secondary responses by observation of cats’ activity, behavior, appetite, and interactions. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events, clinical signs, and hematologic and plasma biochemical variables (before and after treatment).
Results—No significant differences were detected among the 3 treatment groups for any primary or secondary efficacy endpoints or for tolerability variables. Robenacoxib tablets administered once daily were significantly more palatable than ketoprofen tablets.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Robenacoxib tablets administered once daily had noninferior efficacy and tolerability, and superior palatability, compared with the active control drug, ketoprofen, for the treatment of signs of acute pain and inflammation associated with musculoskeletal disorders in cats.
Objective—To compare the efficacy of adrafinil,
propentofylline, and nicergoline for enhancing behavior
of aged dogs.
Animals—36 Beagles between 9 and 16 years old.
Procedure—Dogs were randomly assigned to receive
adrafinil (20 mg/kg of body weight, PO, q 24 h; n = 12),
propentofylline (5 mg/kg, PO, q 12 h; 12), or nicergoline
(0.5 mg/kg, PO, q 24 h; 12) for 33 days. Baseline
behaviors in an open field and in kennels (home cage)
were recorded before treatment. After treatment,
behaviors in the open field were recorded 2 hours
after drug administration on days 2, 15, and 28, and 10
hours after administration on days 7, 20, and 33.
Behaviors in the home cage were recorded 2 and 7
hours after drug administration on days 4, 17, and 30.
Results—Treatment with adrafinil resulted in a significant
increase in locomotion in each of the open-field
tests and an increase in locomotion in the home cage.
This latter increase was smaller and more variable
than that in the open field. Locomotion was not
affected by treatment with propentofylline or nicergoline.
In the open field, sniffing decreased over time in
all 3 groups, but the largest decline was observed in
the propentofylline group.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Treatment
with adrafinil may improve the quality of life of aged
dogs by increasing exploratory behavior and alertness.
(Am J Vet Res 2000;61:1410–1414)