Oral Transmucosal or Intramuscular Administration of Dexmedetomidine–Methadone Combination in Dogs: Sedative and Physiological Effects

SIMPLE SUMMARY: During the last decade, new alternative non-invasive administration routes for drug delivery have gained interest in veterinary medicine. The administration of drugs via the oral transmucosal route is non-invasive, painless, easy to perform, and generally well tolerated. Furthermore, it avoids gastric acid degradation typical of oral administration. All these characteristics contribute to make this administration route very attractive, especially for veterinary patients who are difficult to inject, fearful, or anxious. In contrast, intramuscular injection is associated with pain and requires more invasive restraint, potentially incrementing patients’ discomfort. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the sedative and clinical effects of a dexmedetomidine–methadone combination following either oral transmucosal and intramuscular administration in healthy dogs and to record any possible adverse effects following each administration route. The present study suggests that oral transmucosal administration of dexmedetomidine and methadone combination provided a satisfactory level of sedation, allowing safe handling of the patients with less pronounced cardiorespiratory effects. Indeed, thanks to the lesser impact on the cardiac function, it could be considered as a useful option for those patients difficult to restrain in which cardiovascular stability should be preserved. ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the sedative and physiological effects following either oral transmucosal (OTM) or intramuscular administration of dexmedetomidine–methadone combination in healthy dogs. Thirty dogs were randomly assigned to receive a dexmedetomidine–methadone combination either by the OTM (n = 15) or intramuscular (n = 15) route. Sedation was scored 10, 20, and 30 min after drugs administration. Heart rate (HR), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), respiratory rate (f(R)), and body rectal temperature were recorded before drugs administration and then every 10 min for 30 min. Propofol dose required for orotracheal intubation was recorded. Sedation scores increased over time within both groups with higher values in intramuscular group (p < 0.05). Within each group, HR decreased significantly compared with baseline (p < 0.001) and was significantly lower in intramuscular group compared with the OTM group (p < 0.001). In both groups, NIBP increased significantly compared with baseline (p < 0.05). In the intramuscular group, f(R) was lower compared with the OTM group at all the observational time points (p < 0.001). Propofol dose was lower in the intramuscular group (p < 0.05). Compared to intramuscular dexmedetomidine–methadone, OTM combination produced lower but effective sedation in healthy dogs.