MedElevator
Войти в исследования Veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia · 2025
A comparison of a transdermal eutectic lidocaine/prilocaine cream and subcutaneous lidocaine injection prior to jugular vein catheterization in horses: a randomized crossover study.
Clinical Trial, VeterinaryСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяRandomized Controlled Trial, VeterinaryНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Amiet Biancia, Rainger Joanne, Zedler Steven, Stewart Allison, Woldeyohannes Solomon, Goodwin Wendy
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare horses' aversive behavioural responses to the application of 5% prilocaine/lidocaine eutectic mixture of local anaesthetics (EMLA) cream versus subcutaneous infiltration of 2% lidocaine, followed by jugular vein catheterization.
STUDY DESIGN: Blinded, randomized study.
ANIMALS: A group of 26 university-owned research horses.
METHODS: Each horse received both treatments at opposite jugular sites with ≥ 12 hours between procedures. One randomly assigned jugular site received 1 g cm-2 of 5% EMLA cream 60 minutes before catheterization, while the contralateral site received 1.5 mL of 2% lidocaine subcutaneously 15 minutes prior. A 14 gauge catheter was introduced percutaneously and maintained for 20 minutes. A total of four blinded evaluators scored aversive behaviours during treatment application and catheterization using a simple descriptive scale (SDS). Treatment sites were assessed for erythema, blanching, or pain immediately after application and at 20 minutes and 24 hours post-catheter removal. Stratified multivariate Mann-Whitney U tests compared SDS values with significance at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Horses showed significantly lower SDS scores during EMLA application versus lidocaine injection (0.3 ± 0.3 and 0.5 ± 0.4, respectively; p = 0.012). However, during catheterization, horses treated with lidocaine had lower SDS scores than those treated with EMLA (0.4 ± 0.4 and 0.8 ± 0.5, respectively; p = 0.006), although this difference was not significant when corrected for catheter placement side (p = 0.077). Neither treatment caused adverse effects at application sites.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The application of 5% EMLA cream was well tolerated in horses and may provide an alternative to subcutaneous infiltration of lidocaine prior to jugular vein catheterization in horses.
STUDY DESIGN: Blinded, randomized study.
ANIMALS: A group of 26 university-owned research horses.
METHODS: Each horse received both treatments at opposite jugular sites with ≥ 12 hours between procedures. One randomly assigned jugular site received 1 g cm-2 of 5% EMLA cream 60 minutes before catheterization, while the contralateral site received 1.5 mL of 2% lidocaine subcutaneously 15 minutes prior. A 14 gauge catheter was introduced percutaneously and maintained for 20 minutes. A total of four blinded evaluators scored aversive behaviours during treatment application and catheterization using a simple descriptive scale (SDS). Treatment sites were assessed for erythema, blanching, or pain immediately after application and at 20 minutes and 24 hours post-catheter removal. Stratified multivariate Mann-Whitney U tests compared SDS values with significance at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Horses showed significantly lower SDS scores during EMLA application versus lidocaine injection (0.3 ± 0.3 and 0.5 ± 0.4, respectively; p = 0.012). However, during catheterization, horses treated with lidocaine had lower SDS scores than those treated with EMLA (0.4 ± 0.4 and 0.8 ± 0.5, respectively; p = 0.006), although this difference was not significant when corrected for catheter placement side (p = 0.077). Neither treatment caused adverse effects at application sites.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The application of 5% EMLA cream was well tolerated in horses and may provide an alternative to subcutaneous infiltration of lidocaine prior to jugular vein catheterization in horses.