4.4 Article

Effectiveness of injection of local anesthetic into the retrobulbar space for postoperative analgesia following eye enucleation in dogs

出版社

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/javma.237.2.174

关键词

-

资金

  1. American College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists Vision for Animals Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-To assess the efficacy of a retrobulbar bupivacaine nerve block for postoperative analgesia following eye enucleation in dogs. Design-Randomized controlled trial. Animals-22 dogs. Procedures-Client-owned dogs admitted to the hospital for routine eye enucleation were enrolled with owner consent and randomly assigned to a treatment (bupivacaine hydrochloride) or control (saline [0.9% NaCl] solution) group. Baseline subjective pain scores were recorded. Anesthesia consisted of hydromorphone and midazolam preoperatively, thiopental or propofol for induction, and isoflurane in oxygen for maintenance. An inferior-temporal palpebral retrobulbar injection of either saline solution or bupivacaine was administered. Transpalpebral eye enucleation was performed. Pain scores were recorded at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 24 hours after extubation (time 0) by observers masked to treatment groups. Dogs were given hydromorphone (0.2 mg/kg [0.09 mg/lb], IM or IV) as a rescue analgesic if the subjective pain score totaled >= 9 (out of a maximum total score of 18) or >= 3 in any 1 category. Results-9 of 11 control dogs required a rescue dose of hydromorphone, but only 2 of 11 dogs in the bupivacaine treatment group required rescue analgesia. Mean time to treatment failure (ie, administration of rescue analgesia following extubation) was 0.56 hours (95% confidence interval, 0.029 to 1.095 hours) for the 11 dogs that received hydromorphone. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Retrobulbar administration of bupivacaine in dogs in conjunction with traditional premedication prior to eye enucleation was an effective form of adjunctive analgesia and reduced the need for additional postoperative analgesics. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2010;237:174-177)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据