4.1 Article

Comparison of variability in cardiorespiratory measurements following desflurane anesthesia at a multiple of the minimum alveolar concentration for each dog versus a multiple of a single predetermined minimum alveolar concentration for all dogs in a group

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH
Volume 67, Issue 12, Pages 1956-1961

Publisher

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.67.12.1956

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective-To determine whether the variability of cardiorespiratory measurements is smaller when administering desflurane at a multiple of the individual's minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) or at a predetermined, identical concentration in all subjects. Animals-10 dogs. Procedures-Desflurane was administered at 1.5 times the individual's MAC (iMAC) and 1.5 times the group's MAC (gMAC). The order of concentrations was randomly selected. Heart rate, respiratory rate, arterial blood pressure, central venous pressure, mean pulmonary artery pressure, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, arterial and mixed-venous blood gas tensions and pH, and cardiac output were measured. The desflurane concentration required to achieve a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 60 mm Hg was then determined. Finally, the desflurane concentration required to achieve an end-tidal Pco(2) of 55 mm Hg was measured. Results-Variances when administering 1.5 iMAC or 1.5 gMAC were not significantly different for any variable studied. Differences between the MAC multiples needed to reach an MAP of 60 mm Hg and the mean of the sample were significantly larger when gMAC was used, compared with iMAC, indicating that a multiple of iMAC better predicted the concentration resulting in a MAP of 60 mm Hg. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Results suggest that, in a small group of dogs, variability in cardiorespiratory measurements among dogs is unlikely to differ whether an inhalant anesthetic is administered at a multiple of the iMAC in each dog or at an identical gMAC in all dogs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available