Analyze Diet
Journal of veterinary internal medicine2012; 26(6); 1494-1499; doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2012.01004.x

Effects of meloxicam and phenylbutazone on equine gastric mucosal permeability.

Abstract: Newer NSAIDs that more selectively target the induced isoform of the cyclooxygenase enzyme (COX2) activity might reduce adverse effects while preserving therapeutic benefits of these drugs. Objective: To compare the effect of oral administration of multiple dose rates of meloxicam and phenylbutazone (PBZ) on gastric mucosal integrity in horses. Methods: Twenty-five light breed horses. Methods: In vivo toxicity study. Horses were randomly assigned to 5 treatment groups, receiving placebo, PBZ (4.4 mg/kg PO q12h day 1, 2.2 mg/kg PO q12h for 4 days, 2.2 mg/kg PO q24h for 9 days), or 3 dose rates of meloxicam (0.6 mg/kg q24h, 1.8 mg/kg q24h, 3.0 mg/kg q24h) for 14 days. Sucrose permeability testing was performed on Day 0 (before treatment) and on Day 13. All personnel involved with data collection or analysis were blinded to treatment. Results: Administration of PBZ at the above dose rate significantly increased gastric permeability to sucrose, evidenced by increased peak serum sucrose concentrations (280-1,580 pg/μL, P = .001) after treatment. Similar changes were not evident after administration of meloxicam at any dose rate tested, or in control horses (P > .05). Treatment was not associated with significant differences in ulceration of the squamous or glandular mucosa. Peak sucrose concentrations were not correlated with serum total protein or albumin concentrations (R(2) = -0.07, P = .61, R(2) = -0.08, P = .58, respectively). Conclusions: These results suggest that PBZ was associated with greater compromise to gastric mucosal integrity than meloxicam.
Publication Date: 2012-10-20 PubMed ID: 23083114DOI: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2012.01004.xGoogle 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.
  • Journal Article
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

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 paper discusses a study comparing the impact of two Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs), meloxicam and phenylbutazone, on the gastric integrity of horses. The study suggests that meloxicam is less harmful to the gastric mucosal integrity of horses compared to phenylbutazone.

Objective and Methodology of the Research

  • The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of meloxicam and phenylbutazone on gastric mucosal integrity in horses, specifically its permeability to sucrose. The researchers aimed to determine if newer NSAIDs, like meloxicam, which more selectively target certain enzymes, could mitigate side effects while still having therapeutic benefits.
  • The study was an in vivo toxicity study involving twenty-five light breed horses. These horses were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups – a placebo group; a group treated with phenylbutazone; and three others treated with varying dose rates of meloxicam. The administration of these treatments was carried out for 14 days.
  • The main method for assessing effects on gastric mucosal integrity was sucrose permeability testing. This was performed before the commencement of treatment (Day 0) and near the end of the treatment period (Day 13). The researchers monitoring the data were blinded to the treatment that each group was receiving.

Results and Findings

  • The study found that administration of phenylbutazone significantly increased gastric permeability to sucrose, which was indicated by increased peak serum sucrose concentrations. This implies that it was compromising gastric mucosal integrity.
  • On the other hand, similar changes were not evident after the administration of meloxicam at any tested dose rate, or in the control horses that received a placebo.
  • The treatment was not associated with significant differences in ulceration of the squamous or glandular mucosa. Also, peak sucrose concentrations were not correlated with serum total protein or albumin concentrations.
  • From these results, the study concludes that phenylbutazone was associated with a greater compromise to gastric mucosal integrity than meloxicam. Hence, meloxicam could potentially be a safer NSAID option for horses.

Cite This Article

APA
D'Arcy-Moskwa E, Noble GK, Weston LA, Boston R, Raidal SL. (2012). Effects of meloxicam and phenylbutazone on equine gastric mucosal permeability. J Vet Intern Med, 26(6), 1494-1499. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.2012.01004.x

Publication

ISSN: 1939-1676
NlmUniqueID: 8708660
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 26
Issue: 6
Pages: 1494-1499

Researcher Affiliations

D'Arcy-Moskwa, E
  • School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia.
Noble, G K
    Weston, L A
      Boston, R
        Raidal, S L

          MeSH Terms

          • Animals
          • Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal / toxicity
          • Female
          • Gastric Mucosa / drug effects
          • Horse Diseases / chemically induced
          • Horses
          • Male
          • Meloxicam
          • Permeability
          • Phenylbutazone / toxicity
          • Sucrose
          • Thiazines / toxicity
          • Thiazoles / toxicity

          Citations

          This article has been cited 9 times.
          1. Flood J, Stewart AJ. Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Associated Toxicities in Horses. Animals (Basel) 2022 Oct 26;12(21).
            doi: 10.3390/ani12212939pubmed: 36359062google scholar: lookup
          2. Whitfield-Cargile CM, Coleman MC, Cohen ND, Chamoun-Emanuelli AM, DeSolis CN, Tetrault T, Sowinski R, Bradbery A, Much M. Effects of phenylbutazone alone or in combination with a nutritional therapeutic on gastric ulcers, intestinal permeability, and fecal microbiota in horses. J Vet Intern Med 2021 Mar;35(2):1121-1130.
            doi: 10.1111/jvim.16093pubmed: 33656183google scholar: lookup
          3. Mendoza FJ, Serrano-Rodriguez JM, Perez-Ecija A. Pharmacokinetics of meloxicam after oral administration of a granule formulation to healthy horses. J Vet Intern Med 2019 Mar;33(2):961-967.
            doi: 10.1111/jvim.15433pubmed: 30768821google scholar: lookup
          4. Banse HE, MacLeod H, Crosby C, Windeyer MC. Prevalence of and risk factors for equine glandular and squamous gastric disease in polo horses. Can Vet J 2018 Aug;59(8):880-884.
            pubmed: 30104780
          5. Hewetson M, Venner M, Volquardsen J, Sykes BW, Hallowell GD, Vervuert I, Fosgate GT, Tulamo RM. Diagnostic accuracy of blood sucrose as a screening test for equine gastric ulcer syndrome (EGUS) in weanling foals. Acta Vet Scand 2018 Apr 13;60(1):24.
            doi: 10.1186/s13028-018-0377-5pubmed: 29653546google scholar: lookup
          6. Hewetson M, Sykes BW, Hallowell GD, Tulamo RM. Diagnostic accuracy of blood sucrose as a screening test for equine gastric ulcer syndrome (EGUS) in adult horses. Acta Vet Scand 2017 Mar 11;59(1):15.
            doi: 10.1186/s13028-017-0284-1pubmed: 28284214google scholar: lookup
          7. Banse H, Cribb AE. Comparative efficacy of oral meloxicam and phenylbutazone in 2 experimental pain models in the horse. Can Vet J 2017 Feb;58(2):157-167.
            pubmed: 28216685
          8. Vivancos M, Barker J, Engbers S, Fischer C, Frederick J, Friedt H, Rybicka JM, Stastny T, Banse H, Cribb AE. Pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of 2 meloxicam oral dosage formulations in healthy adult horses. Can Vet J 2015 Jul;56(7):730-6.
            pubmed: 26130835
          9. Walliser U, Fenner A, Mohren N, Keefe T, deVries F, Rundfeldt C. Evaluation of the efficacy of meloxicam for post-operative management of pain and inflammation in horses after orthopaedic surgery in a placebo controlled clinical field trial. BMC Vet Res 2015 May 15;11:113.
            doi: 10.1186/s12917-015-0427-4pubmed: 25976845google scholar: lookup