Evaluation of contact heat thermal threshold testing for standardized assessment of cutaneous nociception in horses - comparison of different locations and environmental conditions

BMC Veterinary Research

Sabine BR Kästner²  Karl Rohn¹  Klaus Hopster³  Christin Poller³ 

[1] Department of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation Hannover, Germany;Clinic for Small Animals, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation Hannover, Germany;Clinic for Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation Hannover, Germany

关键词: Environmental condition;    Contact heat;    Pain;    Nociception;    Horse;   

Others  :  1119634
DOI  :  10.1186/1746-6148-9-4

 received in 2012-04-04, accepted in 2013-01-02,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of contact heat thermal stimulation in horses at different body sites and under different environmental conditions and different test situations. Five warm-blood horses were equipped with the thermal probe located on the skin of nostril (N), withers (W) or coronary band (C). Skin temperature and reaction temperature (thermal threshold) at each location were measured and percent thermal excursion (% TE = 100 * (threshold temperature - skin temperature)/(cut-out temperature - skin temperature) was calculated. Environmental conditions were changed in partial random order for all locations, so each horse was tested in its familiar box stall and stocks, in the morning and evening and at warm and cold ambient temperatures. Type of reaction to the stimulus and horse’s general behaviour during stimulation were recorded. The stimulation sites were examined for the occurrence of possible skin lesions.

Results

Skin temperatures were significantly different during warm and cold ambient temperatures at all three locations, but remained constant over repeated stimulation. An obvious response to stimulation before reaching cut-out temperature could be detected most frequently at N and W in boxes during warm ambient temperatures. The most frequent type of reaction to thermal stimulation at the nostril was headshaking (64.6%), skin twitching at the withers (82.9%) and hoof withdrawal at the coronary band (79.2%).

Conclusion

The outcome of thermal threshold testing depended on ambient temperature, stimulation site and environment. Best results with the WTT2 in horses were obtained at the nostrils or withers in a familiar environment at warm ambient temperatures.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Poller et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Le Bars D, Gozariu M, Cadden SW: Animal models of nociception. Pharmacol Rev 2001, 53(4):597-652.
• [2]D’Amour FE, Smith DL: A method for determining loss of pain sensation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1941, 72:74-79.
• [3]Luttinger D: Determination of antinociceptive efficacy of drugs in mice using different water temperatures in a tail-immersion test. J Pharmacol Methods 1985, 13:351-357.
• [4]Woolfe G, Macdonald AD: The evaluation of the analgesic action of pethidine hydrochloride (Demerol). J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1944, 80:300-307.
• [5]Robertson SA, Sanchez LC, Merritt AM, Doherty TJ: Effect of systemic lidocaine on visceral and somatic nociception in conscious horses. Equine Vet J 2005, 37(2):122-127.
• [6]Sanchez LC, Elfenbein JR, Robertson SA: Effect of acepromazine, butorphanol, or N-butylscopolammonium bromide on visceral and somatic nociception and duodenal motility in conscious horses. Am J Vet Res 2008, 69:579-585.
• [7]Love EJ, Taylor PM, Murrell J, Dixon MJ, Whay HR, Waterman-Pearson AE: Modification of a feline thermal threshold testing system for use in horses [abstract]. Vet Anaesth Analg 2008, 35(3):s10.
• [8]Elfenbein JR, Sanchez LC, Robertson SA, Cole CA, Sams R: Effect of detomidine on visceral and somatic nociception and duodenal motility in conscious adult horses. Vet Anaesth Analg 2009, 36:162-172.
• [9]Pippi NL, Lumb WV, Fialho SAG, Scott RJ: A model for evaluating pain in ponies. J Equine Med Surg 1979, 3:430-435.
• [10]Kamerling SG, Weckman TJ, DeQuick DJ, Tobin T: A method for studying cutaneous pain perception and analgesia in horses. J Pharmacol Methods 1985, 13:267-274.
• [11]Carregaro AB, Luna SPL, Mataqueiro MI, de Queiro-Neto A: Effects of buprenorphine on nociception and spontaneous locomotor activity in horses. Am J Vet Res 2007, 68:246-250.
• [12]Dhanjal JK, Wilson DV, Robinson E, Tobin TT, Dirokulu L: Intravenous tramadol: effects, nociceptive properties, and pharmacokinetics in horses. Vet Anaesth Analg 2009, 36:581-590.
• [13]Dixon MJ, Robertson SA, Taylor PM: A thermal threshold testing device for evaluation of analgesics in cats. Res Vet Sci 2002, 72:205-210.
• [14]Love EJ, Murrell J, Whay HR: Thermal and mechanical nociceptive threshold testing in horses: a review. Vet Anaesth Analg 2011, 38:3-14.
• [15]Lascelles BDX, Waterman AE, Cripps PJ, Livingston A, Henderson G: Central sensitization as a result of surgical pain: investigation of the pre-emptive value of pethidine for ovariohysterectomy in the rat. Pain 1995, 62:201-212.
• [16]Whay HR, Waterman AE, Webster AJF, O’Brien JK: The influence of lesion type on the duration of hyperalgesia associated with hindlimb lameness in dairy cattle. Vet J 1998, 156:23-29.
• [17]Chambers JP, Waterman AE, Livingston A: Further development of equipment to measure nociceptive thresholds in large animals. Vet Anaesth Analg 1994, 21:66-72.
• [18]Van Dierendonck MC, De Vries H, Schilder MBH, Colenbrander B, þorhallsdóttir AG, Sigurjónsdottir H: Interventions in social behaviour in a herd of mares and geldings. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2009, 116:67-73.
• [19]Love EJ, Taylor PM, Murrell J, Whay HR: Effects of acepromazine, butorphanol and buprenorphine on thermal and mechanical nociceptive thresholds in horses. Equine Vet J 2012, 44(2):221-225.
• [20]Lichtman AH, Smith FL, Martin BR: Evidence that the antinociceptive tail-flick response is produced independently from changes in either tail-skin temperature or core temperature. Pain 1993, 55:283-295.
• [21]Pringle J, Roberts C, Kohl M, Lekeux P: Near infrared spectroscopy in large animals: optical pathlength and influence of hair covering and epidermal pigmentation. Vet J 1999, 158:48-52.
• [22]Wegner K, Soma KLR, Ippolito M, Uboh CE: Validation of a wireless thermal and mechanical nociceptive testing device in horses. New Zealand: Proceedings of the 18th international conference of racing analysts and veterinarians; 2010.
• [23]Mayhew IGJ: Evaluation of large animal neurologic patients: Neurologic evaluation. In Large animal neurology. 2nd edition. Edited by Mayhew IGJ. Chichester, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell Pub; 2009:11-46.
• [24]Monteiro-Riviere NA, Bristol DG, Manning TO, Rogers RA, Riviere JE: Interspecies and interregional analysis of the comparative histologic thickness and laser Doppler blood flow measurements at five cutaneous sites in nine species. J Invest Dermatol 1990, 95(5):582-586.
• [25]TjØlsen A, Rosland JH, Berge O, Hole K: The increasing- temperature Hot- plate test: an improved test of nociception in mice and rats. J Pharmacol Methods 1991, 25:241-250.
• [26]Klatzkin RR, Mechlin B, Girdler SS: Menstrual cycle phase does not influence gender differences in experimental pain sensitivity. Eur J Pain 2010, 14(1):77-82.
• [27]Terner JM, Lomas LM, Picker MJ: Influence of estrous cycle and gonadal hormone depletion on nociception and opioid antinociception in female rats of four strains. J Pain 2005, 6(6):372-383.
• [28]Brosnan RJ, Pypendop BH, Siao KT, Stanley CD: Effects of remifentanil on measures of anesthetic immobility and analgesia in cats. Am J Vet Res 2009, 70(9):1065-1071.