Effect of meloxicam and carprofen on renal function when administered to healthy dogs prior to anesthesia and painful stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether administration of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs meloxicam or carprofen to healthy dogs that were subsequently anesthetized and subjected to painful electrical stimulation has adverse effects on renal function as measured by glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and evaluation of serum concentrations of urea and creatinine. ANIMALS: 6 male and 6 female healthy young-adult Beagles. PROCEDURE: A study was conducted in accordance with a randomized crossover Latin-square design. One of 3 treatments (saline [0.9% NaCl] solution, 0.2 mg of meloxicam/kg, or 4.0 mg of carprofen/kg) was administered i.v. 1 hour before anesthesia was induced by use of drugs in accordance with a standard anesthetic protocol (butorphanol tartrate and acepromazine maleate as preanesthetic medications, ketamine hydrochloride and diazepam for induction, and maintenance with isoflurane). Anesthetized dogs were subjected to intermittent electrical stimulation for 30 minutes. Direct, mean arterial blood pressure; heart rate; and respiratory rate were monitored. End-tidal isoflurane concentration was maintained at 1.5 times the minimum alveolar concentration. The GFR, as measured by plasma clearance of 99mTc-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid, and serum concentrations of serum and creatinine were determined 24 hours after induction of anesthesia. RESULTS: Neither meloxicam nor carprofen significantly affected GFR or serum concentrations of urea and creatinine, compared with values for the saline treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: When administered 1 hour before onset of anesthesia and painful electrical stimulation, meloxicam or carprofen did not cause clinically important alterations of renal function in young healthy dogs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".