This article, written by veterinarians whose caseloads include brachycephalic dogs, argues that there is now widespread evidence documenting a link between extreme brachycephalic phenotypes and chronic disease, which compromises canine welfare. This paper is divided into nine sections exploring the breadth of the impact of brachycephaly on the incidence of disease, as indicated by pet insurance claims data from an Australian pet insurance provider, the stabilization of respiratory distress associated with brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS), challenges associated with sedation and the anaesthesia of patients with BOAS; effects of brachycephaly on the brain and associated neurological conditions, dermatological conditions associated with brachycephalic breeds, and other conditions, including ophthalmic and orthopedic conditions, and behavioural consequences of brachycephaly. In the light of this information, we discuss the ethical challenges that are associated with brachycephalic breeds, and the role of the veterinarian. In summary, dogs with BOAS do not enjoy freedom from discomfort, nor freedom from pain, injury, and disease, and they do not enjoy the freedom to express normal behaviour. According to both deontological and utilitarian ethical frameworks, the breeding of dogs with BOAS cannot be justified, and further, cannot be recommended, and indeed, should be discouraged by veterinarians.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic effects of maxillary and/or inferior alveolar nerve blocks with lidocaine and bupivacaine in cats undergoing dental extractions. Twenty-nine cats were enrolled. Using an adapted composite pain scale, cats were pain scored before the dental procedure and 30 mins, and 1, 2 and 4 h after isoflurane disconnection. Cats were sedated with buprenorphine (20 µg/kg), medetomidine (10 µg/kg) and acepromazine (20 µg/kg) intramuscularly. Anaesthesia was induced using alfaxalone (1–2 mg/kg) intravenously and maintained with isoflurane in oxygen. Each cat was randomly assigned to receive maxillary and/or inferior alveolar nerve blocks or no nerve blocks prior to dental extractions. Each nerve block was performed using lidocaine (0.25 mg/kg) and bupivacaine (0.25 mg/kg). Heart rate, systolic arterial blood pressure, respiratory rate, end tidal carbon dioxide and isoflurane vaporiser settings were recorded 5 mins before and after the dental extractions, and the difference calculated. Group mean differences (mean ± SD) for heart rate (−9.7 ± 10.6 vs 7.6 ± 9.5 beats/min [nerve block vs control group, respectively], P <0.0001), systolic arterial blood pressure (−10.33 ± 18.44 vs 5.21 ± 15.23 mmHg, P = 0.02) and vaporiser settings (−0.2 ± 0.2 vs 0.1 ± 0.4, P = 0.023) were significantly different between groups. The control group had higher postoperative pain scores (median [interquartile range]) at 2 h (3 [1.75–4.00] vs 1 [0–2], P = 0.008) and 4 h (4 [2–6] vs 2 [1–2], P = 0.006) after the dental extractions. Maxillary and inferior alveolar nerve blocks with lidocaine and bupivacaine administered prior to dental extractions resulted in a reduction in heart rate and blood pressure while allowing for a reduction in isoflurane. Cats receiving nerve blocks had lower postoperative pain scores than the group without nerve blocks.

Opioid-free anaesthesia in three dogs

The aim of the study was to develop a multifactorial tool for assessment of sedation in dogs. Following a modified Delphi method, thirty-eight veterinary anaesthetists were contacted to describe the following levels of awareness: no-sedation, light, moderate, profound sedation and excitation. The answers were summarized in descriptors for each level. A questionnaire was created with all the variables obtained from the descriptors. The questionnaire was returned to the panel of anaesthetists to be used before and after real sedations in conjunction with the previous 5-point categorical scale. Data obtained were analysed using the classification-tree and random-forest methods. Twenty-three anaesthetists (60%) replied with descriptions. The descriptors and study variables were grouped in categories: state-of-mind, posture, movements, stimuli-response, behaviour, response-to-restraint, muscle tone, physiological data, facial-expression, eye position, eyelids, pupils, vocalization and feasibility-to-perform-intended-procedure. The anaesthetists returned 205 completed questionnaires. The levels of awareness reported by the anaesthetists were: no sedation in 92, mild (26), moderate (37) and profound in 50 cases. The classification-tree detected 6 main classifying variables: change in posture, response-to-restraint, head-elevation, response-to-toe-pinching, response-to-name, and movements. The random-forest found that the following variables: change in posture, response-to-restraint, head-elevation, response-to-name, movements, posture, response-to-toe-pinching, demeanour, righting-reflex and response-to-handclap, were classified correctly in 100% awake, 62% mild, 70% moderate and 86% of profound sedation cases. The questionnaire and methods developed here classified correctly the level of sedation in most cases. Further studies are needed to evaluate the validity of this tool in the clinical and research setting.

Background: Patient safety is essential in small animal anaesthesia. This study aimed to assess anaesthesia‐related deaths in cats worldwide, identify risk and protective factors and provide insights for clinical practice. Methods: A prospective multicentre cohort study of 14,962 cats from 198 veterinary centres across different countries was conducted. Data on anaesthesia‐related deaths, from premedication up to 48 hours postextubation, were collected. Logistic regression was used to analyse patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, procedure type and anaesthetic drugs. Results: The anaesthesia‐related mortality was 0.63%, with 74.5% of deaths occurring postoperatively. Cats with cachexia, a higher ASA status or who underwent abdominal, orthopaedic/neurosurgical or thoracic procedures exhibited elevated mortality. Mechanical ventilation use was associated with increased mortality. Mortality odds were reduced by the use of alpha ₂ ‐agonist sedatives, pure opioids in premedication and locoregional techniques. Limitations: Limitations include non‐randomised sampling, potential biases, unquantified response rates, subjective death cause classification and limited variable analysis. Conclusions: Anaesthetic mortality in cats is significant, predominantly postoperative. Risk factors include cachexia, higher ASA status, specific procedures and mechanical ventilation. Protective factors include alpha ₂ ‐agonist sedatives, pure opioids and locoregional techniques. These findings can help improve anaesthesia safety and outcomes. However, further research is required to improve protocols, enhance data quality and minimise risks.