MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402541749 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.722

PSLBI-14 Assessment of the effective tissue concentrations of injectable lidocaine and a lidocaine-impregnated latex band for castration in calves and lambs

2024· article· en· W4402541749 on OpenAlexaff
Nick Allan, Joe Ross, S.M. Roche, Kendall Beaugrand, Crystal Schatz, Ann Hammad, Brenda Ralston, Andrea M. Hanson, Merle S. Olson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsChinook Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidocaineCastrationMedicineChemistryAnimal scienceAnesthesiaBiologyInternal medicineHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tail docking in lambs and castration in lambs and calves are common husbandry practices, both of which cause pain and discomfort, for which many industries recommend or require pain management. The purpose of this study was to assess the effective tissue concentrations of the current standard of care for pain mitigation in calves and lambs during castration or tail docking (injectable lidocaine) and to assess the ability of a lidocaine-loaded elastration band (LLB) to deliver effective concentrations into the scrotal or tail tissues over time. This work comprised four different field trials (n = 50/trial): 1) effective concentrations of injectable lidocaine in the scrotal tissue of dairy calves; 2) the in vivo delivery of effective concentrations of lidocaine from LLBs placed on the calf scrotums; 3) effective concentrations of injectable lidocaine in the scrotal and tail tissue of lambs; and 4) the in vivo delivery of effective concentrations of lidocaine from LLBs placed on the lamb scrotums and tails. Sensation in the tissue of interest was assessed by electrocutaneous stimulation. Sensation was correlated to tissue concentrations of lidocaine by analyzing sampled tissue for lidocaine content by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). Injectable lidocaine allowed for short-term anesthesia for up to 60 min calves, highlighting the importance of finding additional strategies to mitigate long-term pain. An effective concentration (EC) yielding 50% reduction in tissue sensation (EC50) of 0.635 (95% CI 0.462 to 0.829) mg/g was calculated for calf scrotal tissue. Based on HPLC data of processed biopsy samples taken over time, the LLBs yielded tissue concentartions of lidocaine that approached EC50 and exceeded EC95 at 2 and 72 h following application, respectively, and remained above those concentartions for at least 28 d after application. In lambs, injectable lidocaine allowed for short-term anesthesia for up to 180 min following injection. An EC50 of 0.174 (95% CI 0.125 to 0.248) mg/g was calculated for lamb scrotal tissue and an EC50 of 0.0765 (95% CI 0.0533 to 0.113) mg/g was calculated for lamb tail tissue. The use of the LLB provided tissue lidocaine concentrations that met or exceeded the EC50 for at least 21 to 28 d and, based on electrostimulation data, provided local anesthesia for at least 3 d when compared with a control band. The use of an LLB could provide a practical, long-duration alternative to injectable lidocaine for pain mitigation during castration and tail docking. Further studies are warranted to compare the use of LLBs to injectable local anesthetics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.368 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207