FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Aust Vet J / Duration of skin desensitisation following palmar digital ne...
Australian veterinary journal2021; 99(12); 541-546; doi: 10.1111/avj.13122

Duration of skin desensitisation following palmar digital nerve blocks with lidocaine, bupivacaine, mepivacaine and prilocaine.

Abstract: Objective comparative evidence of the time to onset and duration of effect provided by local anaesthetic (LA) agents for perineural blocks in the horse is lacking. Clear knowledge of these properties is required to guide clinically appropriate agent selection and aid interpretation of response to diagnostic blocks for lameness examinations. An interventional study, with complete, randomised crossover design was used to compare time to onset and duration of skin desensitisation provided by four LA agents applied to palmar digital nerve blocks in 12 horses. Effect at each time point was determined using a pressure gauge to measure the mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT) over the heel bulbs. Complete desensitisation was defined when MNT was greater than four times the pre-block baseline. Onset and duration of complete desensitisation were recorded and compared across agents using a mixed linear model. When significant (P ≤ 0.05), post-hoc paired comparisons between agents were performed against a Tukey's corrected P ≤ 0.05. Onset of complete skin desensitisation for each agent was <5 min. Duration for lidocaine (mean 25 min; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9-42) was shorter than bupivacaine (53 min; 95% CI 39-65), which was shorter than both prilocaine (102 min; 95% CI 81-123) and mepivacaine (107 min; 95% CI 92-121), which were not different. Although onset of complete skin desensitisation was not different for the LA agents tested, duration varied from 25 min to nearly 2 h. Prilocaine and mepivacaine provided the most prolonged duration of effect, both exceeding bupivacaine.
© 2021 Australian Veterinary Association.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-09-26 PubMed ID: 34569052DOI: 10.1111/avj.13122Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research is focused on understanding the duration and onset of skin desensitization after administering local anesthetics (lidocaine, bupivacaine, mepivacaine, and prilocaine) for nerve blocks in horses. The study objectives were met by measuring the mechanical nociceptive threshold on the heel bulbs of horses at different time frames post anesthesia to analyze and compare the agents’ effectiveness.

Research Methodology

  • For this study, an interventional study design with randomised crossover was chosen. The experiment involved applying four different local anesthetic agents to palmar digital nerve blocks in 12 horses.
  • The effect was measured at different time points using a pressure gauge to determine the mechanical nociceptive threshold over the horse’s heel bulbs.
  • Complete desensitisation was defined when the mechanical nociceptive threshold was more than four times the pre-block baseline.
  • The researchers recorded onset and duration of complete desensitisation and carried out comparison across the four agents using a mixed linear model.
  • If the results were significant, further comparisons were carried out using Tukey’s method for significance correction.

Research Findings

  • The onset of complete skin desensitisation for all agents tested was less than 5 minutes.
  • The duration for lidocaine was found to be the shortest, with a mean of 25 minutes. This was followed by bupivacaine with a duration of 53 minutes.
  • Prilocaine and mepivacaine resulted in the longest effect, with similar durations of 102 minutes and 107 minutes respectively. These two agents provided a significantly longer period of desensitisation than both lidocaine and bupivacaine.
  • The results indicate that although the onset of complete skin desensitisation was similar across all local anesthetics tested, the duration of the effect varied, ranging from 25 minutes to nearly 2 hours.

Conclusion

  • This research helps reveal the varying performance of common anesthetics in horses. Such information can guide veterinarians in choosing the most appropriate anesthesia, depending on the required duration of effect, which can potentially improve the care provided in lameness examinations and treatments.

Cite This Article

APA
Harcourt MM, Smith RL, Hosgood G. (2021). Duration of skin desensitisation following palmar digital nerve blocks with lidocaine, bupivacaine, mepivacaine and prilocaine. Aust Vet J, 99(12), 541-546. https://doi.org/10.1111/avj.13122

Publication

Australian veterinary journal
ISSN: 1751-0813
NlmUniqueID: 0370616
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 99
Issue: 12
Pages: 541-546

Researcher Affiliations

Harcourt, M M
  • Equine Department, College of Veterinary Medicine, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Smith, R L
  • Equine Department, College of Veterinary Medicine, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Hosgood, G
  • Small Animal Surgery Department, College of Veterinary Medicine, Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.

MeSH Terms

  • Anesthetics, Local / adverse effects
  • Animals
  • Bupivacaine
  • Horses
  • Lidocaine / adverse effects
  • Mepivacaine
  • Nerve Block / veterinary
  • Prilocaine

Grant Funding

  • Murdoch University

References

This article includes 52 references
  1. Schumacher J, Boone L. Local anaesthetics for regional and intra-articular analgesia in the horse.. Equine Vet Educ 2021;33:159-168.
  2. Pilsworth R, Dyson S. Where does it hurt? Problems with interpretation of regional and intra-synovial diagnostic analgesia.. Equine Vet Educ 2015;27:595-603.
  3. Schumacher J, Schramme MC, Schumacher J. Diagnostic analgesia of the equine digit.. Equine Vet Educ 2013;25:408-421.
  4. Hopster K, Eps AW. Pain management for laminitis in the horse.. Equine Vet Educ 2019;31:384-392.
  5. Cousins MJ, Bridenbaugh PO, Carr DB. Cousins and Bridenbaugh's neural blockade in clinical anesthesia and pain medicine.. Pennsylvania, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009.
  6. Garcia ER. Local anesthetics.. Veterinary anesthesia and analgesia, the fifth edition of Lumb and Jones. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2015;332-354.
  7. Wyn-Jones G. Equine lameness.. Oxford, Blackwell, 1988.
  8. Covino BG, Giddon DB. Pharmacology of local anesthetic agents.. J Dent Res 1981;60:1454-1459.
  9. Furst A. Chapter 73 - Diagnostic and regional surgical anesthesia of the limbs and axial Skeleton.. JA Auer, JA Stick, JM Kummerle & T Prange, 5th ed. Equine Surgery. St Louis, MO: Elsevier. 2019;1220-1242.
  10. Day TK, Skarda RT. The pharmacology of local anesthetics.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1991;7:489-500.
  11. Zarucco L, Driessen B, Scandella M. Continuous Perineural Block of the Palmar Nerves: A New Technique for Pain Relief in the Distal Equine Forelimb.. Clin Tech Equine Pract 2007;6:154-164.
  12. Silva GB, De La Côrte FD, Brass KE. Duration and efficacy of different local anesthetics on the palmar digital nerve block in horses.. J Equine Vet Sci 2015;35:749-755.
  13. Hoerdemann M, Smith RL, Hosgood G. Duration of action of mepivacaine and lidocaine in equine palmar digital perineural blocks in an experimental lameness model.. Vet Surg 2017;46:986-993.
  14. Harkins JD, Mundy G, Woods W. Lidocaine in the horse: its pharmacological effects and their relationship to analytical findings.. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1998;21:462-476.
  15. Harkins J, Karpiesiuk W, Woods W. Mepivacaine: its pharmacological effects and their relationship to analytical findings in the horse.. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1999;22:107-121.
  16. Bidwell L, Brown K, Cordier A. Mepivacaine local anaesthetic duration in equine palmar digital nerve blocks.. Equine Vet J 2004;36:723-726.
  17. Harkins JD, Lehner A, Karpiesiuk W. Bupivacaine in the horse: relationship of local anaesthetic responses and urinary concentrations of 3-hydroxybupivacaine.. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1999;22:181-195.
  18. Harkins J, Mundy G, Stanley S. Determination of highest no effect dose (HNED) for local anaesthetic responses to procaine, cocaine, bupivacaine and benzocaine.. Equine Vet J 1996;28:30-37.
  19. Ra R, Frauenfelder H. Arthrocentesis in the horse.. Equine Vet J 1982;14:173-177.
  20. Harcourt M, Smith C, Bell R. Magnetic resonance and radiographic imaging of a case of bilateral bipartite navicular bones in a horse.. Aust Vet J 2018;96:464-469.
  21. Schaaf K, Kannegieter N. Regional nerve blocks and intra-articular injections in the horse-techniques, complications and reasons for variation in results.. Aust Equine Vet 2005;2005:70-78.
  22. Dyson S. Nerve blocks and lameness diagnosis in the horse.. In Pract 1984;6:102-107.
  23. Walmsley JP, Pettersson H, Winberg F. Impingement of the dorsal spinous processes in two hundred and fifteen horses: case selection, surgical technique and results.. Equine Vet J 2002;34:23-28.
  24. Tremaine WH. Local analgesic techniques for the equine head.. Equine Vet Educ 2007;19:495-503.
  25. Isen D. Review of local anesthetics with a discussion of prilocaína 4%.. Dent Econ 2004;94:10.
  26. Subramaniam S, Tennant M. A concise review of the basic biology and pharmacology of local analgesia.. Aust Dent J 2005;50:S23-S30.
  27. MIMS online [Internet]. Crows Nest (NSW): MIMS Australia; 2021. Citanest; [updated 2020 Dec; cited 2021 Jan 21]. Available from: https://www.mimsonline.com.au/Search/FullPI.aspx?ModuleName=Product%20Info&searchKeyword=prilocaine&PreviousPage=~/Search/QuickSearch.aspx&SearchType=&ID=18970001_2
  28. Glowacki L, Dowarkasing R, Moon-Borton A. The metabolism and excretion of prilocaine in the horse after subcutaneous administration.. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of Racing Analysts and Veterinarians 2010 March; Queenstown, NZ, ISGRV.
  29. Sillence M, Noble G, Schneiders F. The pharmacokinetics of equine medications.. Barton (ACT): Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation; 2012 Jan. p61-65. Report No.:11/117.
  30. Ethell M, Hodgson D, Hills B. The synovial response to exogenous phospholipid (synovial surfactant) injected into the equine radiocarpal joint compared with that to prilocaine, hyaluronan and propylene glycol.. N Z Vet J 1999;47:128-132.
  31. Haussler K, Erb H. Mechanical nociceptive thresholds in the axial skeleton of horses.. Equine Vet J 2006;38:70-75.
  32. Jordana M, Martens A, Duchateau L. Distal limb desensitisation following analgesia of the digital flexor tendon sheath in horses using four different techniques.. Equine Vet J 2014;46:488-493.
  33. Luna S, Lopes C, Rosa A. Validation of mechanical, electrical and thermal nociceptive stimulation methods in horses.. Equine Vet J 2015;47:609-614.
  34. Love EJ, Murrell J, Whay H. Thermal and mechanical nociceptive threshold testing in horses: a review.. Vet Anaesthesia Analg 2011;38:3-14.
  35. Nagy A, Malton R. Diffusion of radiodense contrast medium after perineural injection of the palmar digital nerves: abstracts.. Equine Vet J 2015;47:14-14.
  36. Spoormakers T, Donker S, Ensink J. Diagnostic anaesthesia of the equine lower limb: a comparison of lidocaine and lidocaine with epinephrine.. Tijdschr voor diergeneeskd 2004;129:548-551.
  37. Schumacher J, Livesey L, De Graves F. Effect of anaesthesia of the palmar digital nerves on proximal interphalangeal joint pain in the horse.. Equine Vet J 2004;36:409-414.
  38. Perez-Castro R, Patel S, Garavito-Aguilar ZV. Cytotoxicity of Local Anesthetics in Human Neuronal Cells.. Anesthesia Analg 2009;108:997-1007.
  39. Selander D. Neurotoxicity of local anesthetics: animal data.. Reg Anesthesia 1993;18:461.
  40. Yamashita A, Matsumoto M, Matsumoto S. A comparison of the neurotoxic effects on the spinal cord of tetracaine, lidocaine, bupivacaine, and ropivacaine administered intrathecally in rabbits.. Anesthesia Analg 2003;97:512-519.
  41. Yang S, Abrahams MS, Hurn PD. Local anesthetic Schwann cell toxicity is time and concentration dependent.. Reg Anesthesia Pain Med 2011;36:444-451.
  42. Hennig GS, Hosgood G, Bubenik-Angapen LJ. Evaluation of chondrocyte death in canine osteochondral explants exposed to a 0.5% solution of bupivacaine.. Am J Vet Res 2010;71:875-883.
  43. Piat P, Richard H, Beauchamp G. In vivo effects of a single intra-articular injection of 2% Lidocaine or 0.5% Bupivacaine on articular cartilage of normal horses.. Vet Surg 2012;41:1002-1010.
  44. Park J, Sutradhar BC, Hong G. Comparison of the cytotoxic effects of bupivacaine, lidocaine, and mepivacaine in equine articular chondrocytes.. Vet Anaesthesia Analg 2011;38:127-133.
  45. Le Bars D, Gozariu M, Cadden SW. Animal models of nociception.. Pharmacol Rev 2001;53:597-652.
  46. Djouhri L, Lawson SN. Aβ-fiber nociceptive primary afferent neurons: a review of incidence and properties in relation to other afferent A-fiber neurons in mammals.. Brain Res Rev 2004;46:131-145.
  47. Chambers J, Waterman A, Livingston A. Further development of equipment to measure nociceptive thresholds in large animals.. Vet Anaesthesia Analg 1994;21:66-72.
  48. Coleman KD, Schmiedt CW, Kirkby KA. Learning confounds algometric assessment of mechanical thresholds in normal dogs.. Vet Surg 2014;43:361-367.
  49. Chambers J, Livingston A, Waterman A. A device for testing nociceptive thresholds in horses.. J Assoc Vet Anaesth G B and Irel 1990;17:42-44.
  50. Kamerling SG, Weckman TJ, Dequick DJ. A method for studying cutaneous pain perception and analgesia in horses.. J Pharmacol Methods 1985;13:267-274.
  51. Todhunter RJ. Anatomy and physiology of synovial joints.. Joint Dis Horse 1996;1:1-28.
  52. Jones E, Viñuela-Fernandez I, Eager RA. Neuropathic changes in equine laminitis pain.. Pain 2007;132:321-331.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.