Title |
Perioperative evaluation of tumescent anaesthesia technique in bitches submitted to unilateral mastectomy
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1746-6148-9-178 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Leonardo de Freitas Guimaraes Arcoverde Credie, Stelio Pacca Loureiro Luna, Fabio Futema, Luciano Cacciari Baruffaldi Almeida da Silva, Giancarlo Bressane Gomes, Jaqueline Neratika Negrette Garcia, Lidia Raquel de Carvalho |
Abstract |
Tumescent anaesthesia (TA) is a widely used technique in oncologic surgeries necessitating large resection margins. This technique produces transoperative and postoperative analgesia, reduces surgical bleeding, and facilitates tissue divulsion. This prospective, randomised, blind study evaluated the use of TA in bitches submitted to mastectomy and compared the effect of TA with an intravenous fentanyl bolus. A 2.5-mcg/kg intravenous fentanyl bolus (n = 10) was compared with TA using 0.275% lidocaine (n = 10) in bitches submitted to unilateral mastectomy. Sedation was performed by intramuscular (IM) injection of 0.05 mg/kg of acepromazine combined with 2 mg/kg of meperidine. Anaesthesia was induced with 5 mg/kg of intravenous propofol and maintained with isoflurane/O2. Heart and respiratory rates; systolic, mean, and diastolic arterial blood pressures; central venous pressure; SpO2; ETCO2; inspired and expired isoflurane concentrations; and temperature were measured transoperatively. Visual analogue scales for sedation and pain and the Glasgow composite and Melbourne pain scales were used for postoperative assessment. The surgeon investigated the quality of the surgical approach, considering bleeding and resection ability, and the incidence of postoperative wound complications. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 25% |
Spain | 1 | 25% |
United States | 1 | 25% |
Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 76 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 14% |
Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
Researcher | 5 | 6% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 5% |
Other | 8 | 10% |
Unknown | 24 | 31% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 26% |
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 12 | 16% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 9% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
Other | 3 | 4% |
Unknown | 27 | 35% |