SILVA, J. K. C.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/5201550048078254; SILVA, Janaina Keilla da Costa.
Resumo:
In order to evaluate the effect of the intramuscular administration of lidocaine on the
induction dose of propofol and alfaxalone in felines, this dissertation was divided into two
chapters: the first to evaluate the effect of the intramuscular administration of lidocaine on
propofol induction dose and some physiological parameters such as: heart rate ( HR),
electrocardiogram, respiratory hate ( RR), systolic arterial pressure ( SAP), oxyhemoglobin
saturation(SpO2) and body temperature ( BT), total propofol dose, skillful anesthetic period
and anesthetic recovery time in felines and the second, o evaluate the effect of the
intramuscular administration of lidocaine on the induction dose of alfaxalone as well as the
skillful period and anesthetic recovery time plus some cardiorespiratory parameters and body
temperature in domestic cats. In the first article ten female cats were used in two groups, each
animal being his own control where they received 0,9% NaCl or 2% lidocaíne (7mgkg) both
intramuscularly. The changes observed in all evaluations of the measured physiological
parameters of the GP and LPG remained within the normal range for the feline species as well
as the electrocardiographic parameters. It was concluded that lidocaine does not potentiate the
hypnotic effect of the propofol and causes minimal changes in physiological parameters, but
there was an increase in the anesthetic recovery time of the LPG group which was 39,50 ±
9,25 minutes compared to the GP 26,00 ± 9,25 minutes. In the second study seven cats were
used in two groups, each animal being its own control, which received 0.9% NaCl solution or
lidocaine ( 7 mg kg) intramuscularly (IM). The minimal variations observed in the evaluated
clinical parameters of GA and GLA remained within normal range for felines, as well as the
electrocardiographic parameters evaluated and that there were no significant changes
regarding the duration and time of anesthetic recovery in both experimental groups. It is
concluded that lidocaine, in the administration route used, does not potentiate the hypnotic
effect of the alfaxalone and does not alter the evaluated parameters or anesthetic recovery.
The two chapters that make up this dissertation allow us to conclude that intramuscularly
administered lidocaine did not decrease the total propofol dose or the total alfaxalone dose
causing minimal changes in the parameters evaluated in the feline species, however increases
the anesthetic recovery time of the GLP whereas in the experiment with the alfaxalone
anesthetic, it did not potentiate its hypnotic effect, promoted minimal changes in feline
physiological parameters and did not interfere with the anesthetic recovery time.