Comparison of post-operative analgesic efficacy of tolfenamic acid and robenacoxib in ovariohysterectomized cats

8Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a non-selective COX inhibitor (tolfenamic acid) and a selective COX-2 inhibitor (robenacoxib) for post-operative pain control in cats. Thirty cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy were randomly divided into three groups: the control (placebo) group, the tolfenamic acid (4 mg/kg/day) group, and the robenacoxib (1 mg/kg/day) group. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were administered orally 2 hr before anesthesia induction and 24 and 48 hr post-operation. Buccal mucosal bleeding times (BMBTs) were assessed prior to anesthesia induction. Colorado pain scores and composite pain scores were evaluated in a blinded fashion before induction and 2, 8, 24, 30 and 48 hr post-operation. The Colorado pain scores of cats receiving robenacoxib were significantly lower than those of cats in the control group at 30 (P=0.0126) and 48 (P=0.0439) hr post-operation. The composite pain scores of cats from the robenacoxib group were lower than those of cats in the control group at 30 (P=0.0299) and 48 (P=0.0103) hr post-operation. The Colorado pain scores of cats receiving tolfenamic acid were significantly lower than those of cats in the control group at 30 hr (P=0.0186) post-operation. The composite pain scores in cats in the tolfenamic acid group were lower than the scores of cats in the control group at 24 (P=0.0403) and 48 (P=0.0413) hr post-operation. BMBTs remained within normal limits in all groups. Both tolfenamic acid and robenacoxib are useful for post-operative pain control in cats.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sattasathuchana, P., Phuwapattanachart, P., & Thengchaisri, N. (2018). Comparison of post-operative analgesic efficacy of tolfenamic acid and robenacoxib in ovariohysterectomized cats. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, 80(6), 989–996. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.17-0443

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