Abdominal Thrusts Improve Vomiting Rate?

Hello, Summarians!

Achieving quick emesis can be life-saving. Here are a couple of tips that could help.

Please give me feedback on ways I can make VetSummary more useful to you.

If it is valuable to you please consider sending it on to a friend 😄 

Ropinirole Vs Apomorphine in Dogs

This study investigates the efficacy of different administration routes of apomorphine and compares them with ropinirole eye drops for inducing emesis in dogs. It finds that intravenous (IV) apomorphine is the most effective method, achieving an 88% success rate, similar to previous studies. Intranasal (IN) administration also proved rapid and effective, especially when IV access is not feasible. However, subconjunctival (SC) and transconjunctival (TC) routes showed less consistent results. Ropinirole eye drops, while easy to administer, only triggered emesis within 10 minutes in about half of the dogs tested. 

The study emphasizes the importance of rapid emesis to prevent gastrointestinal issues from ingested toxins and examines the practical difficulties in administering these treatments to non-compliant dogs due to anxiety or fear. It suggests that IN administration of apomorphine could be a viable and effective alternative when IV administration poses challenges. The findings indicate a need for further research on dosage optimization and the efficacy of different routes depending on the substances ingested. 

Manley, S. R., Berg, A. N., Rozanski, E. A., Sweigart, B. A., & Lynch, A. M. (2024). Intranasal and intravenous apomorphine outperform ropinirole ocular drops for induction of emesis in dogs within ten minutes: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 262(5), 635-639. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.23.11.0628 

Bottom line — Apomorphine wins.

Abdominal Thrusts to Aid in Emesis.

This study investigated the impact of applying abdominal thrusts to dogs after administering intravenous apomorphine for inducing emesis. The main findings were: 

Efficacy of Abdominal Thrusts: Dogs that received abdominal thrusts post-apomorphine administration had a higher rate of successful emesis compared to those that did not receive any additional intervention. However, abdominal thrusts did not lead to a faster onset of emesis. 

Comparison to Previous Studies: The success rate of emesis induction in this study was similar to that reported in previous studies for the experimental group, but lower in the control group. Also, the time to emesis was longer compared to earlier studies, which might be due to variations in the compounded apomorphine used, differences in patient populations, or the nature and timing of foreign material ingestion. 

Impact of Dog Size: Larger dogs showed a quicker onset of emesis, which might be due to stronger muscle contractions aiding the emetic process. 

Limitations: The study was limited by a small sample size, potential protocol violations, and variability in the type of ingested foreign material, which were not fully accounted for. No long-term follow-up was performed to assess potential complications from abdominal thrusts. 

Overall, the study suggests that abdominal thrusts are a feasible adjunctive technique to enhance emesis induction in dogs treated with apomorphine, although it does not hasten the onset of emesis. Further research with a larger sample size and more controlled variables is recommended to confirm these findings. 

Chan, T. T., Gonzalez, A. L., & Lyons, B. M. (2024). Use of abdominal thrusts is associated with improved rates of successful emesis induction in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.23.12.0681 

Bottom line — Early results support this as a beneficial protocol

Cobalamin supplementation methods

This study compared the effectiveness of oral versus parenteral cobalamin supplementation in treating dogs with hypocobalaminaemia due to chronic enteropathy, including cases with severe clinical or biochemical abnormalities. The primary goal was to determine if oral supplementation was as effective as parenteral in restoring normal cobalamin levels. The study found that oral cobalamin supplementation was non-inferior to parenteral supplementation in achieving this goal. Both treatment methods also resulted in similar reductions in serum methylmalonic acid levels, which is a marker of cellular cobalamin deficiency. 

Additionally, the study assessed treatment tolerance and ease of administration from the perspective of pet owners. It found no significant difference in dogs' and owners' quality of life or satisfaction between the two supplementation methods, even among dogs with severe conditions. Oral supplementation was generally well-tolerated, similar to other oral medications, despite concerns about compliance due to some dogs' reduced appetite. 

The study also highlighted several challenges, such as small sample sizes and variations in case management due to its multi-centric nature. Despite these limitations, the findings support the use of oral cobalamin supplementation as a viable and effective treatment for dogs with chronic enteropathy and hypocobalaminaemia. 

 Dor, C., Nixon, S., Salavati Schmitz, S., Bazelle, J., Černá, P., Kilpatrick, S., Harvey, N.D. and Dunning, M. (2024), Efficacy and tolerance of oral versus parenteral cyanocobalamin supplement in hypocobalaminaemic dogs with chronic enteropathy: a controlled randomised open-label trial. J Small Anim Pract, 65: 317-328. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.13705 

Bottom line — Oral supplementation is a viable option in dogs.

Just putting things in perspective …