Autumn Dzierzawski
Research Mentor(s): Alvaro Rojas-Peña
Mentor Department: Department of Surgery-Transplantation
Authors: Autumn Dzierzawski, Daniela Palaez-Palacio, Jensyn VanZalen, Ryan Kauffman, Caitlyn Bocks, Orsolya Lautner-Csoba, Robert Bartlett, Alvaro Rojas-Peña
Session: Session 1 (9:00am – 9:50am)
Presentation Type: Poster 42
Abstract
Intro: In translational research involving large animals, ensuring their care is of utmost importance. Effective pain management is a fundamental aspect of animal welfare, aimed at alleviating suffering while reducing the side effects associated with analgesics. This study aims to evaluate different pain management protocols within an ovine animal model specifically for surgical cutdown procedures intended to obtain vascular access for extracorporeal life support (ECLS). Methods: Ten healthy sheep (n=10) underwent surgery for ECLS vascular access through skin cutdowns in the right neck and right groin while under general anesthesia. They were assigned to three pain management protocols: Group 1 (n=2): 0.6 mg IM buprenorphine every 6 hours for 24 hours post-surgery; Group 2 (n=4): 100 mcg transdermal fentanyl patch (TDFP) on the front leg prior to surgery, plus 0.6 mg IM buprenorphine every 6 hours for 24 hours post-surgery; and Group 3 (n=4): 100 mcg TDFP on the back prior to surgery, plus 0.6 mg IM buprenorphine every 6 hours for 24 hours post-surgery. Sheep behavior and hemodynamics were monitored for 36 hours post-surgery using a standardized pain scoring system that assessed heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), alertness (lethargic vs. alert), appetite (presence vs. absence), vocalization, and bruxism (teeth-grinding), with each indicator contributing one point to the total pain score. Results: Postoperative pain assessment revealed that all three methods effectively managed pain, with scores remaining below 1.5. Notably, animals in Group 2 had the lowest pain scores. The average pain scores at hours 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 were as follows: Group 1: 1.04±0.21, 0.90±0.02, 1.04±0.04, 1.04±0.04, 0.84±0.09, and 0.84±0.05; Group 2: 0.65±0.12, 0.45±0.11, 0.50±0.19, 0.45±0.19, 0.71±0.27, and 0.64±0.22; and Group 3: 0.75±0.17, 0.79±0.16, 0.72±0.33, 0.77±0.19, 0.79±0.49, and 0.75±0.36. Additionally, Group 1 exhibited several instances of decreased appetite during the first 36 hours of observation, a trend not seen in the other groups. No significant differences were noted in RR, vocalization, or alertness among the groups. Conclusions: All three pain management protocols effectively controlled pain in this model. However, the combination of buprenorphine and a transdermal fentanyl patch (TDFP) applied to the front leg (Group 2) demonstrated the most effective pain management, as evidenced by the lowest average pain scores. Additional testing and data are necessary to further refine these methods and enhance the results.
