ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024
Evaluation of the Quality of Recovery from General Anesthesia in Dogs with Two Different Low Doses of Dexmedetomidine.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Timing-controlled concept for extubation in brachycephalic dogs: α2-bridged on-demand extubation.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Emergence delirium in small animals: a first step towards an objective assessment.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of recovery from general anesthesia with the administration of two low doses of dexmedetomidine in canine patients. For this blind randomized clinical trial study, 30 dogs undergoing general anesthesia for diagnostic procedures or elective surgery (ovariectomy/castration) were included. The patients were randomly divided into three groups, and at the end of anesthesia, they received a bolus of dexmedetomidine at 1 mcg/kg IV (D1), or a bolus of dexmedetomidine at 0.5 mcg/kg (D0.5), or a bolus of NaCl, in a total of 0.5 mL of solution for all three groups. After administration of the bolus, the anesthetist monitored the patients every 5 min by measuring heart rate, systolic and mean blood pressure, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation. The quality of recovery was also assessed using 4 different scales. The extubation time, time of headlift, and standing position were also recorded. Both groups receiving dexmedetomidine had better awakening and a lower incidence of delirium when compared to saline administration. The heart rate was lower, while the systolic pressure was higher in the two groups D1 and D0.5 compared to the NaCl with a low presence of atrioventricular blocks. The extubation time resulted significantly higher in the D1 (17 ± 6 min) compared to the D0.5 (10 ± 4 min) and NaCl (8 ± 3 min) (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.