Evaluation of Oral Robenacoxib for the Treatment of Postoperative Pain and Inflammation in Cats: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy and safety of robenacoxib were assessed for the control of postoperative pain and inflammation in cats. The study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, blinded, and parallel group clinical trial. A total of 249 client-owned cats scheduled for forelimb onychectomy plus either ovariohysterectomy or castration surgeries were included. All cats received butorphanol prior to anesthesia and forelimb four-point regional nerve blocks with bupivacaine after induction of general anesthesia. Cats were randomized to receive daily oral tablet robenacoxib, at a mean (range) dosage of 1.84 (1.03-2.40) mg/kg (n = 167), or placebo (n = 82), once prior to surgery and for two days postoperatively. Significantly (P < 0.05) fewer robenacoxib cats received additional analgesia rescue therapy (16.5%) than placebo cats (46.3%). Pain elicited on palpation of the soft tissue incision site, behavior following social interaction, and posture assessed during the first 8 hours after extubation were significantly (P < 0.05) improved in cats receiving robenacoxib. Frequency of reported adverse clinical signs, hematology, serum chemistry and urinalysis variables, and body weight changes weresimilar between groups. In conclusion, robenacoxib was effective and well tolerated in the control of postoperative pain and inflammation in cats undergoing onychectomy with ovariohysterectomy or castration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.034 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".