Objective

To evaluate the immobilization quality and cardiopulmonary effects of etorphine alone compared with etorphine–azaperone in blesbok (Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi).

Study design

Blinded, randomized, crossover design.

Animals

A total of 12 boma-habituated female blesbok weighing [mean ± standard deviation (SD)] 57.5 ± 2.5 kg.

Methods

Each animal was administered etorphine (0.09 mg kg^–1) or etorphine–azaperone (0.09 mg kg^–1; 0.35 mg kg^–1) intramuscularly with 1-week intertreatment washout period. Time to first sign of altered state of consciousness and immobilization time were recorded. Physiological variables were recorded, arterial blood samples were taken during a 40-minute immobilization period, and naltrexone (mean ± SD: 1.83 ± 0.06 mg kg^–1) was intravenously administered. Recovery times were documented, and induction, immobilization and recovery were subjectively scored. Statistical analyses were performed; p < 0.05 was significant.

Results

No difference was observed in time to first sign, immobilization time and recovery times between treatments. Time to head up was longer with etorphine–azaperone (0.5 ± 0.2 versus 0.4 ± 0.2 minutes; p = 0.015). Etorphine caused higher arterial blood pressures (mean: 131 ± 17 versus 110 ± 11 mmHg, p < 0.0001), pH, rectal temperature and arterial oxygen partial pressure (59.2 ± 7.7 versus 42.2 ± 9.8 mmHg), but lower heart (p = 0.002) and respiratory rates (p = 0.01). Etorphine–azaperone combination led to greater impairment of ventilatory function, with higher end-tidal carbon dioxide (p < 0.0001) and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (58.0 ± 4.5 versus 48.1 ± 5.1 mmHg). Immobilization quality was greater with etorphine-azaperone than with etorphine alone (median scores: 4 versus 3; p < 0.0001).

Conclusions and clinical relevance

Both treatments provided satisfactory immobilization of blesbok; however, in addition to a deeper level of immobilization, etorphine–azaperone caused greater ventilatory impairment. Oxygen supplementation is recommended with both treatments.

中文翻译：

---

与依托啡嗪-氮杂哌酮相比，单独的依托啡肽的固定化质量和心肺功能对水s（Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi）有效。

目的

为了评估固定质量和单独与blesbok埃托-阿扎哌隆（相比埃托啡的心肺效应转角牛羚属pygargus phillipsi）。

学习规划

盲目，随机，交叉设计。

动物

总共12只由博马犬适应的雌性美洲豹[平均±标准差（SD）]为57.5±2.5公斤。

方法

每只动物经1周的治疗间隔期肌注肌肉注射依托啡（0.09 mg kg ^–1）或依托啡-azaperone（0.09 mg kg ^–1； 0.35 mg kg ^–1）。记录到意识状态改变的第一个迹象的时间和固定时间。记录生理变量，在固定的40分钟内采集动脉血样本，并静脉注射纳曲酮（平均±SD：1.83±0.06 mg kg ^–1）。记录恢复时间，并主观评分诱导，固定和恢复。进行统计分析；p <0.05显着。

结果

治疗之间的首次征象时间，固定时间和恢复时间均无差异。依托啡嗪-氮杂哌酮的抬头时间更长（0.5±0.2 vs 0.4±0.2分钟；p  = 0.015）。内啡肽引起较高的动脉血压（平均值：131±17对110±11 mmHg，p <0.0001），pH，直肠温度和动脉血氧分压（59.2±7.7对42.2±9.8 mmHg），但心脏降低（p  = 0.002 ）和呼吸频率（p  = 0.01）。埃托啡-氮杂哌酮组合导致更大的通气功能障碍，潮气末二氧化碳含量更高（p<0.0001）和二氧化碳的动脉分压（58.0±4.5对48.1±5.1 mmHg）。依托啡嗪-氮杂哌酮的固定质量比单独使用依托啡肽的固定质量更高（中位数：4比3；p <0.0001）。

结论与临床意义

两种处理均能令人满意地固定水s。然而，除了更深层次的固定外，依托啡-氮杂哌酮还引起更大的通气障碍。两种治疗均建议补充氧气。