Abstract
Background: Pigs are anesthetized when used for emergency procedures live tissue training (LTT) of civilian and military medical personnel or for experimental purposes, but there is a paucity in the literature regarding anesthesia of pigs for this purpose. Objective(s): The main goals of the study were to compare oxygen debt, macrocirculatory parameters, and time to cardiac arrest between pigs in hemorrhagic shock and anesthetized with propofol-ketamine-dexmedetomidine or alfaxalone-ketamine-dexmedetomidine. Design: A prospective, non-blinded randomized study design was used. Sixteen pigs were randomized in blocks of four to be anesthetized with either propofol-ketamine-dexmedetomidine (n = 8) or alfaxalone-ketamine-dexmedetomidine (n = 8) as a continuous infusion. Interventions: Premedication with ketamine 15 mg kg(-1) and midazolam 1 mg kg(-1) was given i.m. Anesthesia was maintained with propofol 8 mg kg(-1) h(-1) or alfaxalone 5 mg kg(-1) h(-1) combined with ketamine 5 mg kg(-1) h(-1) and dexmedetomidine 4 μg kg(-1) h(-1) i.v. A stepwise, volume-controlled model for hemorrhage was created by exsanguination. Main Outcome Measures: Indices of oxygen debt (lactate, base excess, and oxygen extraction), macrocirculatory (PR, SAP, DAP, MAP, and CI, SVI, and TPR) variables, and time to death was compared between groups. Results: Pigs in the alfaxalone group had significantly higher SAP than pigs given propofol. No difference in other macrocirculatory variables or indices of oxygen debt could be found. A blood loss of 50% of the total blood volume or more was possible in most pigs with both anesthetic regimes. Conclusions: Pigs anesthetized with propofol or alfaxalone combined with ketamine and dexmedetomidine tolerated substantial blood loss.