MSD Animal Health has launched an improved on-farm calf-side scour pathogen testing kit for faster diagnosis of the main infectious organisms implicated in a disease outbreak.

According to the company, the new ScourCheck Rapid Programme promises a 10-minute diagnostic turnaround from faecal sample to result, enabling the veterinary practitioner to offer more timely disease management recommendations without having to wait for a laboratory report. The new kits deliver on-farm identification of rotavirus, coronavirus, cryptosporidium and E. coli K99.

Further details on the ScourCheck Rapid Programme are available from MSD Animal Health account managers.

Virbac has has announced the launch of Buprevet, a buprenorphine-based, injectable solution indicated for the potentiation of sedative effects of centrally-acting agents in dogs and for use in cats and dogs as part of a multimodal approach to analgesia.

Buprevet is presented in a 10 ml multi-dose bottle which can be broached up to 25 times and can be open for up to 28 days.

Sarah Walker MRCVS, Product Manager, said: "Buprenorphine is a potent, high affinity, synthetic opioid agonist which forms a key element of practice anaesthetic protocols and complements our existing anaesthetic range. Its potentiation effects means less sedation is needed in the pre-medication and in the anaesthesia, facilitating smoother recoveries with more comfortable patients."

"Buprenorphine is a tried and trusted solution for analgesia in many practices. Buprevet can be given pre-operatively to allow analgesia during and after surgery. It works effectively as part of a pre-emptive approach to analgesia, alongside products such as Inflacam and Carprox in our NSAIDs range."

VetSurgeon Jobs has announced that from today, veterinary employers can display the salary and benefits they offer as an integral part of their recruitment advertisement on VetSurgeon.org, in a way designed to give jobseekers a realistic expectation.

In the past, few employers in the veterinary profession have chosen to advertise salary details, perhaps because they don't want to open a negotiation with their cards on the table, or perhaps they've been fearful of their existing employees finding out what they're prepared to offer a new candidate.

In the VetSurgeon forums, some employers have also remarked that the job isn't about money, and they wouldn't be interested in a candidate whose search criteria included the salary on offer. 

The reality, of course, is that we all have bills to pay, children to feed or mortgages to cover and whilst few if any veterinary surgeons search for a job on the basis of salary alone, it's perfectly reasonable that the salary is part of their deliberations. 

More than that, all the indications are that job advertisements which include salary details generate more, better qualified responses. Reed carried out a survey of 1000 jobseekers in 2016, 2/3rds of whom said they would be more likely to apply when a salary is displayed on the advert. Another company, Smart Recruit Online, found back in 2013 that job adverts which included a salary generated 30% more responses that those that didn't.

There are also indications that in the future, Google may start to prioritise jobs advertised with salary information in its search results. 

To try and strike a balance between some employers' reluctance to display what they might be prepared to pay and the need for greater transparency, advertisers can now display a 'Minimum Offer' on VetSurgeon Jobs, described to the potential applicant as: "The minimum this employer is prepared to offer someone with the skills and experience needed to fulfil the job requirements. They may or may not be prepared to offer more. They may also be prepared to accept someone with a lower level of qualification or experience for an amount less than displayed."

Alternatively, employers can advertise a 'Pay Range', described to potential applicants as: "The employer expects to pay something within the displayed range, depending on their assessment of the value of the applicant's skills and experience to the practice."

In addition, employers can also display other benefits which are likely to be of more or less value to individual applicants, such as a RCVS fees, association subscriptions, health insurance and CPD allowances.

VetSurgeon.org Editor Arlo Guthrie said: "This is entirely optional, but I do hope as many employers as possible will make good use of this new feature, because all the research and anecdotal evidence suggests it’s what candidates want to hear, and it should lead to a better response. Not to mention how time-saving it is for two people to come to the table with realistic expectations."

New research conducted by the Royal Veterinary College (RVC), which shows that French bulldog bitches are 15.9 times more likely to suffer from difficult births (dystocia) than crossbred bitches, has been published in the Veterinary Record today.

Furthermore, the research found that among female dogs that had problems giving birth, French bulldog bitches are then 2.4 times more likely to undergo invasive caesarean sections than crossbred dogs.

This compared to brachycephalic bitches in general, which the RVC researchers found are 1.54 times more likely to need a caesarean compared with their longer-nosed pure breed or crossbred counterparts.

As part of the research, academics studied 20,000 bitches that required emergency treatment at 50 Vets Now veterinary clinics between 2012 and 2014.

Their findings, published in two papers in The Veterinary Record, highlight the substantial risks that bitches and their puppies face during the birthing process. 

According to the first paper¹, 3.7% of female dogs suffer from dystocia. Alongside French bulldogs, other pure breeds such as Boston terriers, chihuahuas and pugs, are also particularly at risk of birthing problems. Compared to crossbred bitches, Boston terriers are 12.9 times more likely to face birthing issues, pugs 11.3 times more likely and chihuahuas 10.4 times more likely.

The second paper², which is available open access, examines the effects of difficult births more closely. It found that on average, 25% of puppies and 1.7% of the bitches do not survive problem births. Apart from the risk of death, problem births also mean that many bitches have to undergo painful and invasive surgery, with 48.6% of problem births needing caesarean surgery.

Bulldogs (also known as British Bulldogs), border terriers and golden retrievers were the top three breeds at risk of caesarean section once they have difficulty giving birth. Bulldogs are 7.6 times more likely, border terriers are 4.9 times more likely and golden retrievers are 4.1 times more likely to need the procedure compared with crossbreeds.

RVC veterinary epidemiologist and VetCompass researcher Dr Dan O’Neill said: "This new research is another piece of evidence suggesting that mankind may have gone too far in modifying dog breed shapes towards extreme conformation that can interfere with basic biological functions. We all need to fall back in love with dog-shaped dogs and move away from the current fascination with extreme-shaped dogs."

References

1. O'Neill, DG., O'Sullivan, AM., Manson, EA., Church, DB., Boag, AK., McGreevy, PD., Brodbelt, DC. (2017) Canine dystocia in 50 UK first-opinion emergency-care veterinary practices: prevalence and risk factors Veterinary Record 181, 88.

2. O’Neill, DG., O’Sullivan, AM., Manson, EA., Church, DB., McGreevy, PD., Boag, AK., Brodbelt, DC.(2019) Canine dystocia in 50 UK first-opinion emergency care veterinary practices: clinical management and outcomes Veterinary Record Published Online First:04 February 2019. doi: 10.1136/vr.104944.

Dr Gerhard Schulze Allen has been struck off by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee after failing to declare a conviction for petty theft in the USA both to a Notary Public in California and to the College.

The Disciplinary Committee heard four charges against Dr Schulze Allen.  

The first charge related to the original criminal conviction in the County of San Bernardino in California dating from September 2013, where Dr Schulze Allen pleaded guilty to petty theft for which he was fined US $435 and ordered to pay a fee of US $35.

The second charge related to the fact that, on or around 3 December 2013 in a written application for restoration to the Register, Dr Schulze Allen was dishonest in representing that he did not have any cautions or criminal convictions.

The third charge related to the fact that on or around 4 December 2013 in a sworn affidavit before a Notary Public in Riverside, California, he dishonestly and falsely represented that he had, at no time, been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or elsewhere.

The final charge was that, in an email to the RCVS in June 2016, he dishonestly and falsely represented that he had "no criminal record whatsoever". 

Having found Dr Schulze Allen guilty of all four charges the Committee then considered whether the conviction rendered him unfit to practise veterinary surgery and whether the remaining charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.

The Committee noted that the conviction was for a minor matter but had regard to all the evidence before it and considered that as an offence of dishonesty it represented a breach of one of the fundamental tenets of the profession. It further considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s dishonesty toward the College and his completing a legal document which he knew would be relied upon by the College was conduct that fell far short of the standard expected of a member of the profession.

With regard to the final charge, the Committee considered this a "clear attempt to deliberately misrepresent the fact that he had a conviction for a criminal offence." The Committee considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s conduct had been aggravated by the fact that it was protracted and repeated over a period of time.

Ultimately the Committee considered that the conviction rendered Dr Schulze Allen unfit to practise veterinary surgery and the remaining charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.

Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "His conduct represented a blatant disregard of the role of the RCVS and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession. The Committee also remained particularly concerned at Dr Schulze Allen’s very limited insight into his conduct."

He added: "In mitigation the Committee noted that this is not a case where harm was caused to any animals or humans. It noted that prior to these matters which are before the Committee that Dr Schulze Allen had an unblemished career and that he had been of good character. In respect of purely personal mitigation the Committee noted that Dr Schulze Allen is the main breadwinner of the family."

However, the Committee considered that Dr Schulze Allen’s conduct had fallen significantly short of standards expected of a veterinary surgeon.

Ian Green concluded: "The Committee considered that the only appropriate sanction is that of removal from the Register. Such a sanction is required to send a clear message to Dr Schulze Allen and to veterinary surgeons of the unacceptability of being dishonest to the RCVS. Such conduct undermines public confidence in the profession and fails to uphold proper standards of conduct and behaviour.

"Accordingly, the Committee has decided that removal from the Register is appropriate and proportionate in this case. The Committee will direct the Registrar to remove the respondent’s name from the Register forthwith."

Dr Schulze Allen has 28 days from the date of the decision to appeal the Committee’s decision.

The Committee’s full findings and decision is available at www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.

A new study published in Veterinary Surgery has concluded that routine radiographs at follow up did not influence postoperative management of most dogs after MPL surgery in the absence of abnormalities on clinical history or orthopaedic examination.

The study¹, which was conducted by surgery resident Dr Charlie Brincin at Highcroft Veterinary Group (soon to be Bristol Vet Specialists) and orthopaedic surgeon Dr Matt Matiasovic at Manchester Vet Specialists, looked at the records of 825 dogs that had been treated surgically for unilateral MPL at 10 referral centres, and then had a planned follow-up visit, including radiographs.

The frequency of, and reasons for, changes in further recovery recommendations were investigated. 

The findings demonstrated that if the dog made an uneventful² recovery after surgery, was presented without owner concern, and if no abnormality was found on physical examination, then radiographic findings only led to a change in recommendation in 3% (13/432) of these dogs.

Researchers say that this reflects similar research on the influence of follow-up radiographs in human medicine, and those of previous veterinary studies on post-operative radiographs, following uncomplicated tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO). These particular studies^3,4 showed radiography had an impact on post-operative management in just 2%-3.8% of cases.

As a result of the MPL and TPLO studies, Highcroft Veterinary Referrals and Manchester Veterinary Specialists will no longer systematically perform follow-up radiographs on their patients, unless justified clinically.

Charlie said: “Radiographs are not without additional costs or risks - including radiation exposure, sedation-associated risks and strain on veterinary staff.

"Radiographic intervention should be clinically justified and our study suggests that if the dog had an uneventful recovery and is presented without owner or clinician raised concern, then repeat radiographs might not be necessary.

"This study also highlights the value of a thorough owner history and clinical examination for clinical decision-making when re-examining dogs following this orthopaedic surgery.”

The MPL study also evaluated factors which significantly increased the risk of finding radiographic abnormalities at routine follow-up, and those which led to a change in post-operative recommendation.

Lameness, administration of analgesia at follow-up, and history of unplanned visits prior to routine re-examination were associated with increased odds of a change in postoperative plan (P < 0.001).

In the absence of owner and clinician concerns, the odds of having a change in convalescence plans were not different, whether or not isolated radiographic abnormalities were present (P = 0.641). 

References

1. Brincin, C, Payne, DJL, Grierson, J, et al. The value of routine radiographic follow up in the postoperative management of canine medial patellar luxation. Veterinary Surgery. 2023; 52( 3): 379- 387. doi:10.1111/vsu.13933
2. The recovery was defined as uneventful where there was no evidence of unplanned attendance to the referring practice or referral institution between postoperative discharge and the scheduled routine follow up and there was no record of complications in the clinical records.
3. Alexander A, Compagnone K, Grierson J, et al. Influence of radiographic examination findings on recommendations made during routine clinical re-evaluation of dogs with uncomplicated tibial plateau leveling osteotomy. Vet Surg. 2021;50(1): 44-52.
4. Olivencia-Morell PJ, Frederick SW, Forbes JN, Cross AR. Evaluation of the clinical value of routine radiographic examination during convalescence for tibial plateau-leveling osteotomy. Vet Surg. 2021;50(8):1644-1649.

Shropshire-based Emma Jane Evans MRCVS has been reprimanded and warned about her future conduct by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee after allowing a colleague to order a veterinary drug for human use and falsifying test results and clinical records.

Ms Evans was charged with causing or allowing a veterinary nurse colleague to order a prescription-only medicine from a practice supplier knowing that it was intended for human use, and made a false entry prescribing the medication on the clinical records of a cat belonging to her nurse colleague.

She was also charged with falsely recording details purporting to be the results of the blood tests on cat and then entering notes on the animal's clinical history which falsely indicated that there had been a meaningful result, and then indicating to the animal's owner that there had been a meaningful result, when in fact the tests had failed to produce any meaningful results. 

The final charge was that her conduct in making the false entry for the prescription-only medication, and all elements of the second charge was dishonest and misleading.

Ms Evans admitted the first charge on the basis that she had allowed rather than caused the order to be made, all the other facts of this charge were admitted.

She admitted the second charge on the basis that she had failed to inform the cat’s owner of the test results, all the other facts of this charge were admitted.

She also admitted that elements of her conduct had been dishonest and misleading.

Having found the charges proven by Ms Evans’ admissions, the Committee considered whether her admitted actions and conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct.

Ms Evans, through her legal counsel, accepted that the admitted charges passed the threshold for serious professional misconduct, though that question still needed to be determined independently by the Committee.

The Committee found that Dr Evans’ conduct had breached several key parts of the Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance, particularly around honesty and integrity.

It also found aggravating factors in this case, including the risk to human health by allowing the prescription-only medication to be ordered knowing it was for human use, the abuse of her professional position, the breach of client trust, the potential adverse impact on the welfare of the cat for whom she falsified the blood test records, and the potential adverse impact on the welfare of the cat for whom she had falsely recorded the prescription-only medicine.

The Committee found no mitigating factors relating to the facts.

Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said in relation to the first charge: “In the Committee’s view, this irresponsible approach to a prescription-only medicine risked human health, potentially compromised an animal’s welfare, since the clinical record suggested the cat had been given Fluconazole when it had not, constituted an abuse of the trust placed in her as a registered veterinary surgeon and was in breach of legal provisions designed to safeguard human health.

“Such behaviour falls far below the standard expected of a registered veterinary surgeon, undermines public confidence in the profession and would be considered deplorable by colleagues and the public alike.

"The Committee was thus satisfied that charge 1 on its own amounts to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”

He added: “Acting dishonestly runs contrary to one of the most fundamental principles of the profession.

"The public need to know that they can rely on the honesty and integrity of the people to whom they entrust the care and welfare of their animals.

“Further, Dr Evans’ conduct in both incidents had the potential to undermine public confidence in the profession of veterinary surgery and bring the profession into disrepute.

"In all the circumstances, the Committee was satisfied that Dr Evans’ behaviour as reflected in charge 2 fell far short of the standard expected of a veterinary surgeon and amounted to disgraceful conduct.

“Accordingly, the Committee found proved the allegation that Dr Evans was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”

Having found serious professional misconduct in relation to all charges, the Committee considered what the most appropriate and proportionate sanction would be for Ms Evans’ actions and conduct.

In doing so, it considered 137 positive references and testimonials from Dr Evans’ professional colleagues and clients, poor staff morale at the practice at the time as well as compelling, exceptional evidence relating to Dr Evans’s health at the time of the two incidents.

In mitigation, the Committee considered the fact that Dr Evans had no previous disciplinary history and had a hitherto unblemished career as a veterinary surgeon; her open and frank admissions; the circumstances of pressures at work exacerbated by Dr Evans’ desire to please everyone and not let anyone down; the fact that Dr Evans was feeling very isolated; the significant insight into her conduct and its impact; effective and targeted remediation to ensure there would be no likelihood of the conduct being repeated; genuine expressions or remorse and apology; support from her employers; and the very significant number of positive testimonials.

Summing up the Committee’s decision on sanction, Mr Morris said “In all the, somewhat exceptional, circumstances of this case, the Committee was satisfied that a reprimand and a warning not to behave in this way again, would provide adequate protection to animals, as it was satisfied Dr Evans was most unlikely to ever make such a flawed set of decisions again.

“The Committee was satisfied that Dr Evans does not represent a risk to animals going forward, indeed from the character evidence it is clear that she always puts the welfare of animals first.

"She has also shown, since this episode, that she can work under pressure and not resort to making bad decisions and thus the Committee considered the wider public interest would best be served in this case by a reprimand and a warning.

“Notwithstanding the serious nature of Dr Evans' conduct, the Committee was satisfied that a fully informed member of the public would not be shocked if Dr Evans were allowed to continue to practise.

“The decision of this Committee is, therefore, that Dr Evans be reprimanded and warned about her behaviour.

"Dr Evans should, however, be under no illusion of how serious it is to have a finding of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect made against her and she should not take lightly the decision of this Committee to reprimand and warn her.”

www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary

MSD Animal Health and the University of Bristol have published the results of their 'Big Flea Project' research¹, which highlights the ongoing need for flea control, and a need to educate owners about the pathogenic risks fleas present.

For the research, 326 recruited veterinary practices examined 812 cats and 662 dogs using a standardised flea inspection protocol in April and June 2018.

Fleas were collected, the species identified, and pooled flea samples from each host were analysed for the presence of pathogens using PCR and sequence analysis.

Overall, fleas were found on 28.1% of cats and 14.4% of dogs.

Unsurprisingly, over 90% of the fleas on both cats and dogs were our dear old friends, Ctenocephalides felis. 

The PCR results found that at least 14% of the samples were positive for at least one pathogen, and 11.3% were positive for Bartonella spp (35 from cats, 4 from dogs), a pathogen which was identified as a risk to veterinary professionals and others with direct animal contact in a 2010 research paper².

Entomologist Professor Richard Wall from the University of Bristol said: "Fleas are the most clinically important ectoparasites of dogs and cats worldwide.

"Rising levels of pet ownership, climate change and globalisation are increasing the importance of a detailed understanding of the endemicity and prevalence of flea-borne pathogens. This requires continued surveillance to detect change.

"The results have shown the high numbers of cats and dogs that still carry fleas and the relatively high prevalence of Bartonella spp found in the samples provided, which is of significant concern for the health of the pet, pet owner and veterinary practice staff."

Nicola Barclay, Senior Product Manager at MSD Animal Health said: "The Big Flea Project results demonstrate the ongoing need for pet owners to understand the importance of flea prevention, particularly with the implications of infestation for human and animal health.

"It’s particularly important at this time of the year as the weather is getting warmer and infestation is more likely to occur.

"Our national launch today has been designed to raise awareness amongst pet owners and encourage them to seek advice from the veterinary practice.

"Building awareness of the risks of fleas to practices and pet owners is also at the forefront of our ongoing campaign."

References

1. Abdullah, S., Helps, C., Tasker, S., Newbury, H. and Wall, R. (2019), Pathogens in fleas collected from cats and dogs: distribution and prevalence in the UK. Parasites and Vectors, 12:71. doi:10.1186/s13071-019-3326-x
2. Breitschwerdt, E. B., Maggi, R. G., Chomel, B. B. and Lappin, M. R. (2010), Bartonellosis: an emerging infectious disease of zoonotic importance to animals and human beings. Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care, 20: 8-30. doi:10.1111/j.1476-4431.2009.00496.x

Three veterinary surgeons have been suspended for one month by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee after admitting dishonesty in relation to the submission of mobility score assessment readings required as part of a dairy animal health and welfare scheme.

Alexander McKinstry and Andrew Rutherford were both charged with writing letters indicating that Rebecca Inman had undertaken an assessment when in fact they had done the assessments themselves, the former without Ms Inman's knowledge, the latter with. 

The charges were that all three, who worked at the same practice group in North-West, had been dishonest, misleading and risked undermining procedures designed to promote animal welfare. 

At the outset of the hearing, all three admitted the charges against them and the Committee found serious professional misconduct in the case of all admitted charges.

The Committee then considered the sanctions for all three of the respondents.

In the cases against Mr McKinstry and Mr Rutherford, the Committee considered that the conduct was premeditated, that they had an increased position of trust and responsibility as practice directors at the time of the misconduct and that it was a breach of trust for the farm clients.

Additionally, Mr McKinstry had put Dr Inman’s professional reputation in jeopardy by not informing her of his conduct.

In mitigation, the Committee considered that there was no harm or risk of harm to animals, the conduct was not done for personal financial gain, that both had been open and frank in their dealings with the RCVS and had shown insight into their behaviour, and their previous good character and unblemished careers.

Regarding Dr Inman, the aggravating factors were the abuse of her position of trust as a registered mobility scorer and the breach of trust with the farm clients.

In mitigation the Committee considered that it had been an isolated incident involving, from Dr Inman’s point of view, a single telephone call.

It also considered that there was no risk of harm, no personal financial gain, her open and frank admissions in dealings with the RCVS, demonstration of insight, previously unblemished record, and efforts to avoid repeats and remediate past misconduct.

Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee carefully weighed the demands of the public interest, as well as the previously stated mitigating and aggravating factors and all the particular circumstances before it.

"The Committee concluded that a period of suspension was sufficient and proportionate in this case to meet the need to maintain public confidence in the profession and uphold proper standards.

"It had a sufficient deterrent effect upon others in the profession and was sufficient to mark that the disgraceful conduct was unacceptable.

“The Committee considered all of the factors before it, and decided that given the personal mitigation in this case, as set out above, a period of one month was appropriate and proportionate in all the circumstances."

The full findings of the Disciplinary Committee regarding this case can be found at: www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary 

Pfizer Animal Health has launched Zylexis for horses, the first and only immunomodulator licensed in the UK to reduce the clinical signs of equine respiratory disease associated with over-crowding and stress.

Zylexis contains inactivated parapox ovis virus (iPPOV), a super-antigen which Pfizer says boosts a horse's immune system to reduce the effects of infectious respiratory disease^1,2 - bridging the gap between potential and performance. 

According to the company, Zylexis acts by stimulating the horse's non-specific immune system, inducing antiviral interferons and interleukins and stimulating innate immune cells. In this way it bridges the gap until the horse's adaptive immune system can develop a pathogen-specific response.^3-5

Pfizer highlights research which has shown a 40.3% reduction in the clinical signs and duration of respiratory disease in young horses under conditions of crowding and stress and a significant reduction of purulent nasal discharge when using Zylexis.^6,7 No local or systemic adverse events were observed in a 999 dose study.⁸

Wendy Talbot, National Veterinary Manager at Pfizer, said: "Zylexis has been licensed in the States and in Germany for a number of years. We believe Zylexis plays a pivotal role in helping to minimise the severity of respiratory disease outbreaks in these countries, therefore helping to maintain performance potential. It's a very welcome addition to the medicine box of UK vets."

The administration of Zylexis is recommended as a course of three single dose intramuscular injections on days 0, 2 and 9. The first dose should be administered shortly before the over-crowding or stressful situation.

References

1. Fachinger V, et al. Evidence for a parapox ovis virus-associated superantigen. Eur J Immunol 2000; 30: 2962-2971.
2. Zylexis Summary of Product Characteristics, April 2012.
3. Mayr A. Development of a non-immunising, paraspecific vaccine from attenuated pox viruses: a new type of vaccine. New Microbiol 2003; 26; 7-12.
4. Weber O, et al. Inactivated parapoxvirus ovis (Orf virus) has antiviral activity against hepatitis B virus and herpes simplex virus. J Gen Virol 2003; 84(Pt 7): 1843-1852.
5. Friebe A, et al. Immunomodulatory effects of inactivated parapoxvirus ovis (Orf Virus) on human peripheral immune cells: induction of cytokine secretion in monocytes and Th1-like cells. J Virol 2004; 78(17): 9400-9411.
6. Pfizer Study No. Equine 1-98.
7. Ziebell KL, et al. The use of Baypamun N in crowding associated infectious respiratory disease: efficacy of Baypamun N (freeze dried product) in 4 -10 month old horses. Zentralbl Veterinarmed B 1997; 44(9): 529- 536
8. Field Safety Trial Report. Nov. 20, 2000, Pfizer Inc.

Dechra has launched Zenalpha, an alpha-2 agonist and peripheral antagonist combination to alleviate the stress of sedation in dogs and maintain the stability of physiological parameters¹.

Zenalpha provides restraint, sedation and analgesia during non-invasive, non-painful or mildly painful procedures and examinations intended to last no more than 30 minutes². 

It is administered intramuscularly and takes effect within 5-15 minutes^{1, 2}. 

Dechra says patients also recover more rapidly², potentially avoiding hospitalisation and allowing them to get home sooner.

Zenalpha contains the active ingredients 0.5 mg/ml medetomidine hydrochloride and 10mg/ml vatinoxan hydrochloride. 

Medetomidine is an alpha-2 agonist used for its sedative and analgesic properties. 

Vatinoxan is a peripherally selective alpha-2 antagonist which Dechra says has limited penetration across the blood-brain barrier, so it works to antagonise only the alpha-2 receptors located in the periphery, reducing cardiovascular side effects without impacting the quality of sedation or analgesia.

In a study of 223 dogs¹ comparing a traditional alpha-2 agonist with Zenalpha, Zenalpha was found to minimise cardiovascular side effects while preserving reliable sedation and analgesia. 

Claire Westoby, brand manager at Dechra said: ‘The next generation of alpha-2 agonists have evolved to provide the same effective and reliable sedation and analgesia, but with reduced cardiovascular side effects and a reduced chance of vomiting.

"This improves the sedation experience for the canine patient, as well as reducing the associated stress commonly experienced by veterinary teams and dog owners.”

Matt Gurney FRCVS, an RCVS and EBVS European Specialist in Veterinary Anaesthesia and hospital director at Anderson Moores, said: “It is really exciting to see the launch of an innovative new product, especially one with a unique mechanism of action that will improve the sedation experience for the vet team and our patients. 

"Zenalpha not only provides a solution to cases where IV placement is not possible and a rapid onset IM option is required, but it also offers a rapid and complete recovery which ensures that dogs can be reunited with their owners and return home as soon as possible.”

Zenalpha is presented in a 10 ml glass vial in individually packed cardboard boxes. 

For more information: www.dechra.co.uk/zenalpha or contact your local Dechra territory manager. 

To watch Matt Gurney’s ‘Zennovation in sedation – the next generation of alpha-2 agonists’: www.dechra.co.uk/academy.

References

1. Turunen H. and Zimmerman N. Safety of a medetomidine- vatinoxan combinationdrug (Zenalpha®) in dogs - a clinical field trial. Proc. IVECCS 2022, IVECCS, San Antonio, 7-11 September
2. Zenalpha EU Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC). European Medicines Agency website. Available at: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/zenalpha-epar-product-information_ en.pdf. Accessed 29 June, 2022

Kruuse has announced that it has become the exclusive UK and Ireland distributor for Pulse Veterinary Technologies LLC shockwave systems, including the Versatron, Versatron 4paws and Equitron.

Shockwave therapy, otherwise known as extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), uses a high-energy sound wave that rapidly increases pressure as it travels through tissue. It is a non-invasive modality used to stimulate healing particularly in ligament, tendon or boney structures.

Andrew Groom, Managing Director, Kruuse UK Ltd said: "This agreement widens the Kruuse equine and small animal capital equipment profile within the UK and Ireland; increasing the range of technologies available to the veterinary practitioner , whilst providing aftercare support of existing shockwave users". 

Eric Goorno , Chief Executive Officer, Pulse Veterinary Technologies LLC said: "This exciting partnership will further enhance our presence within the veterinary industry and allow Kruuse UK to bring leading edge technology to its customers, building upon its strong relationships within veterinary practices".