ArticleBMC veterinary research2025
Comparative antinociceptive and sedative effects of epidural romifidine and xylazine in dromedary Camels (Camelus dromedarius).
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Lumbosacral epidural administration of 4% articaine with epinephrine in dromedary camels (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Correction: Comparative antinociceptive and sedative effects of epidural romifidine and xylazine in dromedary Camels (Camelus dromedarius).BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the pain-relieving and calming effects of giving romifidine and xylazine through an epidural in camels were compared. Twenty-one adult camels (9 non-pregnant females and 12 intact males) weighing between 400-450 kg were randomly divided into three equal groups. Each group received one of the following treatments: an equal volume of sterile saline, 0.17 mg/kg of xylazine, or 50 g/kg of romifidine. All of the treatments were put directly into the sacrococcygeal space after being diluted in 0.9% sterile saline solution until the final volume was 20 ml. Before treatment and then at 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 min after administration, the perineal analgesia, sedation, and degree of ataxia were evaluated. At these same times, rectal temperature (RT), heart rate (HR), and respiration rate (RR) were simultaneously measured. Epidural administration of romifidine and xylazine resulted in varying degrees of sedation, ranging from mild to deep, alongside complete antinociception affecting the perineum, inguinal area, and flank. This effect extended distally to the coronary band of the hind limbs and cranially to the thoracic region. After romifidine, analgesia started more quickly than with xylazine (6 ± 1.05 vs. 14.17 ± 0.83). The duration of both antinociceptive for romifidine was substantially longer than that of xylazine (159 ± 6.38 vs. 63.33 ± 2.47). The onset time of sedation was substantially shorter after romifidine (6.8 ± 0.83 min) compared to xylazine (10.8 ± 0.83 min). Romifidine's sedative effect lasted longer than xylazine's (149.17 ± 4.16 vs. 108.33 ± 1.05 min). At every study measurement point, the romifidine and xylazine-treated groups showed negligible RT, HR, and RR changes. Conclusion: Romifidine or xylazine may be a reliable, durable, and economical method for epidural anesthesia in camels undergoing standing surgery, as romifidine has a faster onset and longer antinociceptive effect. Therefore, epidural romifidine could be a more effective treatment option for immediate postoperative pain.
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.