Clinical evaluation of propofol as an intravenous anaesthetic agent in cats and dogs

Coopers Animal Health Ltd, Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire.

The clinical efficacy and safety of an emulsion containing 10 mg/ml of the intravenous anaesthetic propofol were evaluated in cats and dogs by veterinary surgeons in eight practices in the United Kingdom. A total of 290 dogs and 207 cats were anaesthetised with propofol either as a single injection for procedures of short duration, or as an induction agent with maintenance provided by further incremental injections or as an induction agent with maintenance by gaseous agents. The mean induction doses of propofol for unpremedicated dogs and cats were respectively 6.55 mg/kg and 8.03 mg/kg. The mean induction doses after premedication with a tranquilliser were 4.5 mg/kg and 5.97 mg/kg for dogs and cats, respectively. Mean recovery times ranged, depending on the method of anaesthesia, from 23 to 40 minutes in dogs and from 27 to 38 minutes in cats; recovery was defined as the time at which the animals were alert and able to stand. Adverse side effects were infrequent, apnoea during induction being the commonest. Acepromazine and atropine were most often used as premedicants although in a few cases diazepam, xylazine and other agents were employed. No clinical incompatibility was observed between propofol and any of the other agents administered during the study. The rapid and usually excitement-free recovery of the animals was a valuable feature of anaesthesia with propofol.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Braun, E. H. Hofmeister, A. A. Lockwood, and S. L. Parfitt Effects of Diazepam or Lidocaine Premedication on Propofol Induction and Cardiovascular Parameters in Dogs J. Am. Anim. Hosp. Assoc., January 1, 2007; 43(1): 8 - 12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. E. Morey, J. H. Modell, D. Shekhawat, D. O. Shah, B. Klatt, G. P. Thomas, F. A. Kero, M. M. Booth, and D. M. Dennis Anesthetic Properties of a Propofol Microemulsion in Dogs Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2006; 103(4): 882 - 887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]