These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of the effects of carbon dioxide and medical air for abdominal insufflation on respiratory parameters in xylazine-sedated sheep undergoing laparoscopic artificial insemination.
    Author: Haan JD, Hay Kraus BL, Sathe SR.
    Journal: N Z Vet J; 2018 Jul; 66(4):167-171. PubMed ID: 29591780.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: To determine if abdominal insufflation with medical air will improve oxygenation and ventilation parameters when compared to insufflation with CO2 in xylazine-sedated sheep undergoing laparoscopic artificial insemination (AI). METHODS: Forty-seven sheep underwent oestrus synchronisation and were fasted for 24 hours prior to laparoscopic AI. Each animal was randomised to receive either CO2 or medical air for abdominal insufflation. An auricular arterial catheter was placed and utilised for serial blood sampling. Respiratory rates (RR) and arterial blood samples were collected at baseline, after xylazine (0.1 mg/kg I/V) sedation, 2 minutes after Trendelenburg positioning, 5 minutes after abdominal insufflation, and 10 minutes after being returned to a standing position. Blood samples were collected in heparinised syringes, stored on ice, and analysed for arterial pH, partial pressure of arterial O2 (PaO2), and CO2 (PaCO2). The number of ewes conceiving to AI was also determined. RESULTS: Repeated measures ANOVA demonstrated temporal effects on RR, PaO2, PaCO2 and arterial pH during the laparoscopic AI procedure (p<0.001), but no difference between insufflation groups (p>0.01). No sheep experienced hypercapnia (PaCO2>50 mmHg) or acidaemia (pH<7.35). Hypoxaemia (PaO2<70 mmHg) was diagnosed during the procedure in 14/22 (64%) ewes in the CO2 group compared with 8/23 (35%) ewes in the medical air group (p=0.053). Overall, 15/20 (75%) ewes in the CO2 group conceived to AI compared with 16/22 (72.7%) in the medical air group (p=0.867). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There were no statistical or clinical differences in RR, PaO2, PaCO2, pH, or conception to AI when comparing the effects of CO2 and medical air as abdominal insufflation gases. None of the sheep experienced hypercapnia or acidaemic, yet 42% (19/45) of sheep developed clinical hypoxaemia, with a higher percentage of ewes in the CO2 group developing hypoxaemia than in the medical air group. Based on the overall analysis, medical air could be utilised as a comparable alternative for abdominal insufflation during laparoscopic AI procedures.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]