Advertisement

Heart rate, arterial pressure and propofol-sparing effects of guaifenesin in dogs

Published:October 12, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaa.2022.10.001

      Abstract

      Objective

      To evaluate the heart rate (HR) and systemic arterial pressure (sAP) effects, and propofol induction dose requirements in healthy dogs administered propofol with or without guaifenesin for the induction of anesthesia.

      Study design

      Prospective blinded crossover experimental study.

      Animals

      A total of 10 healthy adult female Beagle dogs.

      Methods

      Dogs were premedicated with intravenous (IV) butorphanol (0.4 mg kg–1) and administered guaifenesin 5% at 50 mg kg–1 (treatment G50), 100 mg kg–1 (treatment G100) or saline (treatment saline) IV prior to anesthetic induction with propofol. HR, invasive sAP and respiratory rate (fR) were recorded after butorphanol administration, after guaifenesin administration and after propofol and endotracheal intubation. Propofol doses for intubation were recorded. Repeated measures analysis of variance (anova) was used to determine differences in propofol dose requirements among treatments, and differences in cardiopulmonary values over time and among treatments with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

      Results

      Propofol doses (mean ± standard deviation) for treatments saline, G50 and G100 were 3.3 ± 1.0, 2.7 ± 0.7 and 2.1 ± 0.8 mg kg–1, respectively. Propofol administered was significantly lower in treatment G100 than in treatment saline (p = 0.04). In treatments G50 and G100, HR increased following induction of anesthesia and intubation compared with baseline measurements. HR was higher in treatment G100 than in treatments G50 and saline following induction of anesthesia. In all treatments, sAP decreased following intubation compared with baseline values. There were no significant differences in sAP among treatments. fR was lower following intubation than baseline and post co-induction values and did not differ significantly among treatments.

      Conclusions and clinical relevance

      When administered as a co-induction agent in dogs, guaifenesin reduced propofol requirements for tracheal intubation. HR increased and sAP and fR decreased, but mean values remained clinically acceptable.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Ammar M.A.
        • Sacha G.L.
        • Welch S.C.
        • et al.
        Sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in COVID-19 patients in the setting of drug shortages.
        J Intensive Care Med. 2021; 36: 157-174
        • Azari D.M.
        • Cork R.C.
        Comparative myocardial depressive effects of propofol and thiopental.
        Anesth Analg. 1993; 77: 324-329
        • Benson G.J.
        • Thurmon J.C.
        • Tranquilli W.J.
        • Smith C.W.
        Cardiopulmonary effects of an intravenous infusion of guaifenesin, ketamine and xylazine in dogs.
        Am J Vet Res. 1985; 46: 1896-1898
        • Bigby S.E.
        • Beths T.
        • Bauquier S.
        • Carter J.E.
        Effect of rate of administration of propofol or alfaxalone on induction dose requirements and occurrence of apnea in dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2017; 44: 1267-1275
        • Brosnan R.J.
        • Steffey E.P.
        • Escobar A.
        • et al.
        Anesthetic induction with guaifenesin and propofol in adult horses.
        Am J Vet Res. 2011; 72: 1569-1575
        • Brüssel T.
        • Theissen J.L.
        • Vigfusson G.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic and cardiodynamic effects of propofol and etomidate: negative inotropic properties of propofol.
        Anesth Analg. 1989; 69: 35-40
        • Bustamante R.
        • Valverde A.
        Determination of a sedative dose and influence of droperidol and midazolam on cardiovascular function in pigs.
        Can J Vet Res. 1997; 61: 246-250
        • Cattai A.
        • Rabozzi R.
        • Ferasin H.
        • et al.
        Haemodynamic changes during propofol induction in dogs: new findings and approach of monitoring.
        BMC Vet Res. 2018; 14: 282
        • Clayes M.A.
        • Gepts E.
        • Camu F.
        Haemodynamic changes during anaesthesia induced and maintained with propofol.
        Br J Anaesth. 1988; 60: 3-9
        • Court M.H.
        • Greenblatt D.J.
        Pharmacokinetics and preliminary observations of behavioral changes following administration of midazolam to dogs.
        J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 1992; 15: 343-350
        • Fujinaka W.
        • Shimizif J.
        • Iribe G.
        • et al.
        Effects of propofol on left ventricular mechanoenergetics in the excised cross-circulated canine heart.
        Acta Med Okayama. 2012; 66: 435-442
        • Glen J.B.
        Animal studies of the anaesthetic activity of ICI 35 868.
        Br J Anaesth. 1980; 52: 731-742
        • Goodchild C.S.
        • Serrao J.M.
        Cardiovascular effects of propofol in the anaesthetized dog.
        Br J Anaesth. 1989; 63: 87-92
        • Haga H.A.
        • Moerch H.
        • Soli N.E.
        Effects of intravenous infusion of guaifenesin on electroencephalographic variables in pigs.
        Am J Vet Res. 2000; 61: 1599-1601
        • Haskins S.C.
        • Farver T.B.
        • Patz J.D.
        Cardiovascular changes in dogs given diazepam and diazepam-ketamine.
        Am J Vet Res. 1986; 47: 795-798
        • Henao-Guerrero N.
        • Riccó C.H.
        Comparison of the cardiorespiratory effects of a combination of ketamine and propofol, propofol alone, or a combination of ketamine and diazepam before and after induction of anesthesia in dogs sedated with acepromazine and oxymorphone.
        Am J Vet Res. 2014; 75: 231-239
        • Herschl M.A.
        • Trim C.M.
        • Mahaffey E.A.
        Effects of 5% and 10% guaifenesin infusion on equine vascular endothelium.
        Vet Surg. 1992; 21: 494-497
        • Hopkins A.
        • Giuffrida M.
        • Larenza M.P.
        Midazolam, as a co-induction agent, has propofol sparing effects but also decreases systolic blood pressure in healthy dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2014; 41: 64-72
        • Hubbell J.A.
        • Muir W.W.
        • Sams R.A.
        Guaifenesin: cardiopulmonary effects and plasma concentrations in horses.
        Am J Vet Res. 1980; 41: 1751-1755
        • Keating S.C.J.
        • Sage A.M.
        • Ambrisko T.D.
        • et al.
        The effect of midazolam or lidocaine administration prior to etomidate induction of anesthesia on heart rate, arterial pressure, intraocular pressure and serum cortisol concentration in healthy dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2020; 47: 160-167
        • Matthews N.S.
        • Peck K.E.
        • Mealey K.L.
        • et al.
        Pharmacokinetics and cardiopulmonary effects of guaifenesin in donkeys.
        J Vet Pharmacol Ther. 1997; 20: 442-446
        • McKay A.C.
        Synergism among I.V. anesthetics.
        Br J Anaesth. 1991; 67: 1-3
        • Minghella A.
        • Auckburally A.
        • Pawson P.
        • et al.
        Clinical effects of midazolam or lidocaine co-induction with propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) in dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2016; 43: 472-481
        • Muñoz K.A.
        • Robertson S.A.
        • Wilson D.V.
        Alfaxalone alone or combined with midazolam or ketamine in dogs: intubation dose and select physiologic effects.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2017; 44: 766-774
        • Musk G.C.
        • Pang D.S.
        • Beths T.
        • Flaherty D.A.
        Target-controlled infusion of propofol in dogs–evaluation of four targets for induction of anaesthesia.
        Vet Rec. 2005; 157: 766-770
        • Pagel P.S.
        • Warltier D.C.
        Negative inotropic effects of propofol as evaluated by the regional preload recruitable stroke work relationship in chronically instrumented dogs.
        Anesthesiology. 1993; 78: 100-108
        • Pagel P.S.
        • Hettrick D.A.
        • Kersten J.R.
        • et al.
        Cardiovascular effects of propofol in dogs with dilated cardiomyopathy.
        Anesthesiology. 1998; 88: 180-189
        • Rubin B.K.
        Mucolytics, expectorants, and mucokinetic medications.
        Respir Care. 2007; 52: 859-865
        • Sams L.
        • Braun C.
        • Allman D.
        • Hofmeister E.
        A comparison of the effects of propofol and etomidate on the induction of anesthesia and on cardiopulmonary parameters in dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2008; 35: 488-494
        • Sánchez A.
        • Belda E.
        • Escobar M.
        • et al.
        Effects of altering the sequence of midazolam and propofol during co-induction of anaesthesia.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2013; 40: 359-366
        • Shafer S.L.
        Advances in propofol pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.
        J Clin Anesth. 1993; 5: 14S-21S
        • Short C.E.
        • Bufalari A.
        Propofol anesthesia.
        Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 1999; 29: 747-778
        • Simon B.T.
        • Scallan E.M.
        • Siracusa C.
        • et al.
        Effects of acepromazine or methadone on midazolam-induced behavioral reactions in dogs.
        Can Vet J. 2014; 55: 875-885
        • Smith A.C.
        • Zellner J.L.
        • Spinale F.G.
        • Swindle M.M.
        Sedative and cardiovascular effects of midazolam in swine.
        Lab Anim Sci. 1991; 41: 157-161
        • Tavernor W.D.
        • Jones E.W.
        Observations on the cardiovascular and respiratory effects of guaiacol glycerol ether in conscious and anaesthetized dogs.
        J Small Anim Pract. 1970; 11: 177-184
        • Taylor P.M.
        • Kirby J.J.
        • Shrimpton D.J.
        • Johnson C.B.
        Cardiovascular effects of surgical castration during anaesthesia maintained with halothane or infusion of detomidine, ketamine and guaifenesin in ponies.
        Equine Vet J. 1998; 30: 304-309
        • Vinik R.H.
        Co-induction: a practical application of anesthetic drug interaction.
        Curr Opin Anesthesiol. 1993; 6: 9-13
        • Wall R.
        • Muir III, W.W.
        Hemolytic potential of guaifenesin in cattle.
        Cornell Vet. 1990; 80: 209-216
        • Wouters P.F.
        • Van de Velde M.A.
        • Marcus M.A.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic changes during induction of anesthesia with eltanolone and propofol in dogs.
        Anaesth Analg. 1995; 81: 125-131
        • Zapata A.
        • Laredo F.G.
        • Escobar M.
        • et al.
        Effects of midazolam before or after alfaxalone for co-induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs.
        Vet Anaesth Analg. 2018; 45: 609-617