Sedlacek HS, Ramsey DS, Boucher JF, Eagleson JS, Conder GA, Clemence RG
Comparative efficacy of maropitant and selected drugs in preventing emesis induced by centrally or peripherally acting emetogens in dogs. [Comparative Study, Journal Article]
J Vet Pharmacol Ther 2008 Dec; 31(6):533-7.
Maropitant (Cerenia; a novel, selective neurokinin(1) receptor antagonist), chlorpromazine, metoclopramide and ondansetron were compared in two randomized, placebo-controlled studies for efficacy in preventing emesis induced by emetogens acting centrally (apomorphine; Study 1) or peripherally (syrup of ipecac; Study 2) in dogs. In each study, ten male and ten female beagles were treated in a five-treatment, five-period crossover design. The five treatments were 0.9% saline (0.1 mL/kg), maropitant (1 mg/kg), metoclopramide (0.5 mg/kg), or chlorpromazine (0.5 mg/kg) all administered subcutaneously, or ondansetron (0.5 mg/kg) administered intravenously. One hour posttreatment dogs were challenged with apomorphine at 0.1 mg/kg intravenously (Study 1) or syrup of ipecac at 0.5 mL/kg orally (Study 2). Following emetogen challenge, dogs were observed for 30 min (Study 1) or 1 h (Study 2) for emesis. No clinical signs, other than those related to emesis, were observed. Efficacy of maropitant in preventing emesis induced centrally by apomorphine was not different (P > 0.05) from metoclopramide or chlorpromazine but was superior (P < 0.0001) to ondansetron. Efficacy of maropitant in preventing emesis induced by syrup of ipecac was not different (P > 0.05) from ondansetron but was superior (P </= 0.0102) to metoclopramide or chlorpromazine. Maropitant was effective (P < 0.0001 relative to control) in preventing vomiting caused by stimulation of either central or peripheral emetic pathways, whereas the other drugs examined prevented vomiting caused by central (metoclopramide and chlorpromazine; P < 0.0001) or peripheral (ondansetron; P < 0.0001) stimulation but not both.
More from this journalRelated subjects (MeSH) |
