Opioids alone or in combination with an NSAID promoted analgesia without adverse effects during the 24-hour postoperative period in dogs undergoing maxillectomy or mandibulectomy for removal of oral neoplasms.

No abstract

Although the utility and benefits of anesthesia and analgesia are irrefutable, their practice is not void of risks. Almost all drugs that produce anesthesia endanger cardiovascular stability by producing dose-dependent impairment of cardiac function, vascular reactivity, and compensatory autoregulatory responses. Whereas anesthesia-related depression of cardiac performance and arterial vasodilation are well recognized adverse effects contributing to anesthetic risk, far less emphasis has been placed on effects impacting venous physiology and venous return. The venous circulation, containing about 65–70% of the total blood volume, is a pivotal contributor to stroke volume and cardiac output. Vasodilation, particularly venodilation, is the primary cause of relative hypovolemia produced by anesthetic drugs and is often associated with increased venous compliance, decreased venous return, and reduced response to vasoactive substances. Depending on factors such as patient status and monitoring, a state of relative hypovolemia may remain clinically undetected, with impending consequences owing to impaired oxygen delivery and tissue perfusion. Concurrent processes related to comorbidities, hypothermia, inflammation, trauma, sepsis, or other causes of hemodynamic or metabolic compromise, may further exacerbate the condition. Despite scientific and technological advances, clinical monitoring and treatment of relative hypovolemia still pose relevant challenges to the anesthesiologist. This short perspective seeks to define relative hypovolemia, describe the venous system’s role in supporting normal cardiovascular function, characterize effects of anesthetic drugs on venous physiology, and address current considerations and challenges for monitoring and treatment of relative hypovolemia, with focus on insights for future therapies.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of the veterinary literature investigating IV fluid therapy in dogs, cats, horses, and cattle.DesignSystematic review.ProceduresThe preferred reporting of items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) was employed for systematic review of all relevant IV fluid therapy manuscripts published from January 1969 through December 2016 in the Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International (CABI) database. Independent grading systems used to evaluate manuscripts included the updated CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2012 checklist, risk of bias for animal intervention studies, criteria for levels of evidence, and methodological quality (Jadad scale). The quality of articles published before and after 2010 was compared.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-nine articles (63 dogs, 7 cats, 39 horses, 30 cattle) from 7,258 met the inclusion criteria. More than 50% of the manuscripts did not comply with minimal requirements for reporting randomized controlled trials. The most non-compliant items included identification of specific predefined objectives or a hypothesis, identification of trial design, how sample size was determined, randomization, and blinding procedures. Most studies were underpowered and at risk for selection, performance, and detection bias. The overall quality of the articles improved for articles published after 2010.Conclusion and clinical relevanceMost of the veterinary literature investigating the administration of IV fluid therapy in dogs, cats, horses, and cattle is descriptive, does not comply with standards for evidence, or provide adequate translation to clinical practice. Authors should employ and journal editors should enforce international consensus recommendations and guidelines for publication of data from animal experiments investigating IV fluid therapy.

In the proposed model of hemorrhagic shock, resuscitation to the established endpoints was achieved within a smaller amount of time and with less volume when guided by PPV than when guided by pulmonary artery catheter-derived RVEDVI.