Comparison of alfaxalone versus propofol as anaesthetic induction agents in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates

2Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

PICO question In routine canine caesareans, is alfaxalone a superior anaesthetic induction agent than propofol in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Three randomised positive clinical trials have compared the efficacy between alfaxalone and propofol in routine canine caesarean sections for increased neonatal survival and vigour Strength of evidence Weak Outcomes reported Although two studies found alfaxalone to be associated with higher Apgar scores for neonates than propofol, each study nonetheless revealed positive vigour and high survival rates from the use of either alfaxalone or propofol. The evidence is too weak to suggest that one induction agent is superior to another. The selection between the two induction agents may not be the main concern in regard to neonatal depression and 24 hour survival post-delivery, provided that the entire canine caesarean protocol is thoroughly and carefully studied Conclusion The evidence is too weak to suggest that alfaxolone or propofol is superior to another during canine cesareans. There is no signifcant difference seen in neonatal survival rate and vigour when using either alfaxolone or propofol.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sofyan, L. M., & Taboada, F. M. (2021). Comparison of alfaxalone versus propofol as anaesthetic induction agents in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates. Veterinary Evidence, 6(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.18849/VE.V6I2.344

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free