Evidence Hub

Clinical evaluation of postoperative analgesia and serum biochemical changes of paracetamol compared to meloxicam and carprofen in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomy

Ismael Hernández-Ávalos, Alexander Valverde, José Antonio Ibancovichi-Camarillo, Pedro Sánchez-Aparicio, Sergio Recillas‐Morales, Jorge Osorio-Ávalos, Desiderio Rodríguez-Velázquez, Agatha Elisa Miranda-Cortés

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), 2019

4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background In veterinary medicine, the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory analgesics (NSAIDs) for the control of postsurgical pain in dogs and cats is common given the anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antipyretic effects of these drugs. This study compared the serum biochemical changes and postoperative analgesic effects of paracetamol, meloxicam, and carprofen in bitches submitted to an ovariohysterectomy using the Dynamic Interactive Visual Analog Scale (DIVAS) and Pain Scale of the University of Melbourne (UMPS) scoring systems. Methods Thirty bitches of different breeds underwent elective ovariohysterectomies and were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: a paracetamol group [15 mg kg -1 intravenous (IV)], a carprofen group (4 mg kg -1 IV), and a meloxicam group (0.2 mg kg -1 IV). All treatments were administered 30 minutes prior to surgery. Paracetamol was administered every 8 hours postoperatively for 48 hours total, while carprofen and meloxicam were intravenously administered every 24 hours. An evaluation of post-surgical pain was done with the DIVAS and the UMPS. The first post-surgical pain measurement was performed 1 hour after surgery and then 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, and 48 hours after surgery. Results All groups exhibited a gradual reduction in pain throughout the postoperative period in both scales; however, neither scale significantly differed between the three treatment groups ( P > 0.05) during the 48…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a preprint, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free