Objective: To characterize and compare two intramuscular drug protocols using alfaxalone and alfaxalone-medetomidine combination for the field immobilization of free-ranging koalas.
Study design: Blinded, randomized, comparative field study.
Animals: A total of 66 free-ranging koalas from the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia.
Methods: Koalas were randomly allocated into two groups. Group A animals were given alfaxalone alone at 3.5 mg kg-1. Group AM animals were given alfaxalone 2 mg kg-1 and medetomidine 40 μg kg-1, reversed with atipamezole at 0.16 mg kg-1. Blinded operators recorded heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (fR), cloacal temperature, depth of sedation and times to: first effect, sedation suitable for clinical interventions, first arousal and full recovery. Data were analysed using independent t test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square analysis and log-rank test at 5% level of significance.
Results: Suitable immobilization for clinical examination and sample collection was achieved in all animals. In groups A and AM, median time to working depth was 6.5 minutes (range: 3.4-15) and 8.1 minutes (range: 4.3-24) and time to complete recovery was 66 minutes (range: 12-138) and 34 minutes (range: 4-84), respectively, following reversal. Time to first effect was significantly shorter in group A (p = 0.013), whereas time to full arousal was significantly shorter in group AM (p = 0.007) probably due to the administration of atipamezole. Maximum HR was 117 ± 28 beats minute-1 in group A, which was a significant increase from baseline values (p < 0.0001), whereas group AM showed a significant tachypnoea of 67 ± 25 (normal fR 10-15; p < 0.0001).
Conclusions and clinical relevance: Both the protocols produced immobilization, enabling clinical examination and sample collection; however, protocol AM was more suitable for field work due to shorter recovery times.
Keywords: alfaxalone; atipamezole; free-ranging; immobilization; koala; medetomidine.
Copyright © 2020 Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists and American College of Veterinary Anesthesia and Analgesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.