vtx logo

request clinical advice

vtx logo sticky

scott@vtx-cpd.com

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 2,440 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Raquel M. 07/03/2026 - 17:24

    Posting about it now!

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Rosie Marshall 05/03/2026 - 10:13

    Hi Rosanna,

    It definitely makes animals feel sick, but I am not aware iof it being used specifically for thhis purpose in practice.

    In dogs it works surprisingly well. Several studies looking at IV tranexamic acid have shown emesis in the majority of dogs (around 85–90%), often within a couple of minutes, which is why people have started discussing it as an alternative to apomorphine in places where that’s hard to obtain.

    Cats are a very different story though. The evidence base there is extremely thin. There are a few reports and small experimental studies suggesting that tranexamic acid can induce vomiting in cats, but the numbers are tiny and the work hasn’t really been replicated much in clinical practice. One small experimental study reported emesis in about 90% of cats using escalating doses up to around 40 mg/kg, but that was in a very controlled setting with healthy animals and only ten cats.

    More broadly, it doesn’t seem to be widely used in practice at the moment, and most of the established feline emesis protocols still rely on alpha-2 agonists such as medetomidine, dexmedetomidine or xylazine, simply because we have much more experience with them and they tend to work reasonably predictably.

    My suspicion is that TXA keeps coming up because it works so well in dogs and it’s a drug that many hospitals already stock for haemorrhage control, so people are naturally wondering whether it might have a role in cats too. But at the moment I’d probably put it in the ā€œinteresting but still a bit experimentalā€ category for feline patients.

    Out of curiosity I’ve actually contacted a couple of ECC colleagues, including one from Vets Now, to ask what they’re currently doing in practice. If I hear anything useful or if anyone is using it more routinely I’ll let you know.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Rosanna Vaughan 02/03/2026 - 12:36

    No problem!

    Let me know if there is anything else I can do.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Raquel M. 07/03/2026 - 17:24

    I did!!!!

    Thanks for flagging! I need to read it properly and I will do a post on it!

    I hope you are well.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Laura S. 06/01/2026 - 13:48

    I popped through an invitation for a free place on the BOAS day!

    Hope you can make it!

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Silvana S. 28/02/2026 - 15:45

    No problem!

    I will get that set up for you.

    Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Emma this is such a difficult situation!

    Can you share the histopathology report with me?

    An eight year old Labrador with histologically confirmed end stage cirrhosis but currently stable blood parameters and a good quality of life is in that grey zone where we want to protect them but also avoid destabilising something that is, for now, compensated. The fact that her liver enzymes, albumin, urea and glucose are all within reference range suggests she is functionally coping despite the architectural change, which is encouraging. The weight loss is concerning but not unexpected in advanced chronic liver disease and may reflect reduced metabolic reserve rather than acute deterioration.

    When I think about vaccination in cases like this I usually break it down into three considerations. First is exposure risk. How high is her genuine risk of encountering Leptospira based on geography, lifestyle, wildlife exposure and local prevalence. A rural, swimming, rodent chasing dog in a high incidence area is a very different scenario to a largely urban, low exposure patient. Second is immune competence. In advanced cirrhosis there can be immune dysregulation, but there is not strong evidence that vaccination meaningfully accelerates hepatic fibrosis or precipitates decompensation in a stable patient. Third is what would happen if she contracted leptospirosis. In a dog with severe pre existing cirrhosis, an acute leptospiral insult could be catastrophic, even if her baseline biochemistry looks acceptable today.

    From a purely pathophysiological perspective, the inflammatory stimulus associated with a modern killed leptospira vaccine is typically transient and mild. We do not tend to see clinically significant hepatic injury from vaccination in stable chronic liver patients. That said, there is always a theoretical risk of transient systemic inflammation and in a dog with very limited hepatic reserve, even a small perturbation could tip them into decompensation, although this would be uncommon.

    In cases like this I often individualise. If exposure risk is low, I would feel comfortable delaying or even omitting the leptospira component and documenting that discussion clearly with the owner. If exposure risk is moderate to high, I would lean towards vaccinating but doing so thoughtfully. That might mean ensuring she is clinically very stable at the time, no intercurrent illness, good hydration, and perhaps scheduling it on a day when the owners can monitor her closely for 24 to 48 hours. I would not routinely premedicate unless there is a history of vaccine reaction.

    You also raise an important point about a possible immune mediated component to the liver disease. In true immune mediated hepatitis, particularly if immunosuppressive therapy is being used, we might be more cautious. But in established end stage cirrhosis without active inflammatory markers and without immunosuppression, the risk profile is a little different.

    Ultimately this becomes a shared decision making conversation with the owner about realistic exposure risk versus theoretical vaccine risk. There is no single right answer, but I would not consider vaccination absolutely contraindicated purely on the basis of stable end stage cirrhosis. I would just approach it carefully and document the rationale.

    I hope that helps a little! What treatment is the patient on at the moment?

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Picture of me doing the procedure for tax.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Hello!

    I hope you are well.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666450X24000063?via%3Dihub

    These are my favourite guidelines for this, and honestly they’re one of the best single ā€œhow-toā€ resources we currently have in small animal medicine:

    Winston JA et al. Clinical Guidelines for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Companion Animals (2024) (Advances in Small Animal Care; doi: 10.1016/j.yasa.2024.06.006). The paper is very practical and walks you through donor selection/screening, product prep (fresh vs frozen, dilutions, filtering, glycerol), and patient prep/administration options. It also has accompanying video content hosted on the journal site, which is genuinely useful for the practical workflow side.

    A couple of quick, cat-specific pearls that are directly aligned with those guidelines (and often answer the common practical questions):

    Donor selection/screening is the whole game in cats (TT foetus PCR, FeLV/FIV status, parasite screening, avoiding raw-fed donors, avoiding recent antibiotics, etc.).

    Use fresh feces when you can, process promptly, and if you freeze product, avoid refreezing after thaw.

    Volume matters in cats—vomiting/regurgitation risk can be volume-dependent, so most people aim for smaller volumes and good retention rather than ā€œbig volume delivery.ā€

    If you tell me what you’re treating the cat for (acute diarrhoea vs chronic enteropathy vs suspected dysbiosis, and whether immunosuppressed / comorbidities), I can help with the case generally if you like!

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Silvana S. 21/02/2026 - 19:52

    Hi Silvana,

    I think that’s a very fair position. A lot of us have taken exactly the same approach. Even if we’ve never personally seen enrofloxacin-associated retinal degeneration, the reports are certainly memorable enough to make you pause, especially when there are reasonable alternatives available.

    Marbofloxacin is a very sensible choice and, in most cases where a fluoroquinolone is indicated, it does the job perfectly well without that lingering concern in the back of your mind. I completely understand the ā€œI’d rather be cautiousā€ mindset, particularly in cats where we already feel like we’re walking a pharmacological tightrope at times.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Silvana S. 21/02/2026 - 19:46

    Hi Silvana,

    Thank you so much for taking the time to reply, and welcome to VTX – it’s genuinely lovely to have you with us. I’m really glad to hear you’ve registered for a few courses already and that you’re enjoying them. That’s wonderful feedback, especially as a newer member just finding your way around the forums.

    Your point about timing is really helpful. An 8:00 pm start makes complete sense if you’re getting home around 7 after a full day in practice. That kind of real-world context is exactly what we need to hear, because there’s no point us choosing a time that works in theory but not in reality for people actually doing the job. We’ll absolutely factor that into our planning for future live sessions.

    I also really appreciate your content suggestions. Clinical case discussions and blood result interpretation are very much in line with what we’re trying to build more of, particularly sessions that focus on how we actually report and talk through results in day-to-day practice rather than just theory. That practical decision-making layer is so important. Your comment about ultrasonography over radiology is interesting too and something we can certainly lean into more. And small mammal content is a great suggestion. Rabbits, guinea pigs and rodents are such a big part of many first opinion caseloads, and they’re often underrepresented in CPD platforms, so that’s very helpful to hear.

    Thank you as well for the encouragement about the platform overall. It really does mean a lot. I hope you’ll be able to join us live soon, and even if you can’t always make it in real time, please do keep sharing your thoughts in the forums. We want this to feel like a genuinely interactive community, not just a library of recordings.

    Thanks again for your thoughtful feedback! We would love to offer you a free spot on the BOAS day. Let me know the best email to send the details to!

    Warm wishes,

    Scott 😊

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Rosanna Vaughan 25/02/2026 - 11:53

    Hi Rosanna,

    No need to apologise at all! Having time to sit down to do anything is rare!

    I do think you were entirely justified in trying to induce emesis in that case. Chocolate (particularly if there’s any chance it was dark) still makes me lean toward attempting decontamination if the timing is even vaguely plausible. With an unknown amount and an unclear time window, you’re often making the best call you can with imperfect information. It’s very easy to second guess these cases afterwards, but from what you described, your reasoning was sound.

    In terms of medetomidine vs dexmedetomidine, you’re right that most of the practical, prospective dosing data specifically looking at emesis in cats has been published using medetomidine, particularly around that 20 µg/kg IM dose. That said, dexmedetomidine is simply the active enantiomer of medetomidine, so pharmacologically it behaves in a very similar way. The success rates in retrospective and experimental studies with dexmedetomidine at around 7 µg/kg IM have also been respectable, although arguably a bit more variable and sometimes more sedating than emetic at lower doses.

    From a purely emesis-focused perspective, I wouldn’t say dexmedetomidine is dramatically superior to medetomidine. If you already stock medetomidine and are comfortable with it, especially now that we’ve got clearer evidence supporting 20 µg/kg IM as a sensible target dose, I think that’s perfectly reasonable in general practice.

    The main arguments for stocking dexmedetomidine are usually broader than emesis. Some practices prefer it for sedation and anaesthesia protocols because of perceived smoother recoveries, dose flexibility, or familiarity from referral/teaching hospital exposure. It’s also sometimes easier to dose precisely in smaller patients depending on the formulation you carry. But specifically for inducing emesis in cats, I don’t think I’d be rushing to change your formulary purely on that basis.

    If you do try the 20 µg/kg IM medetomidine next time, I’d just plan for predictable sedation, have atipamezole ready, and give it a short, defined window to work before moving on to charcoal and supportive care. I think having a clear internal protocol makes these situations much less stressful.

    Feline emesis is still more art than science in many ways!

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Hello Fiona!

    I hope you are well. Thank you so much for joining the course. I hope you are enjoying it!

    I will make sure Filipe sees this question and we will get back to you ASAP.

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Replying to Annet Krabbenborg 06/02/2026 - 15:27

    Hey Annet!

    I hope you are well. I tried my best to find some literature to help answer here!

    From the human medicine side most formal guidelines including those from the American Diabetes Association still recommend single use of insulin needles. This is largely driven by sterility consistency and medico legal clarity rather than strong evidence of harm from reuse. When you look at the actual clinical literature the picture is more nuanced. Multiple studies in people have shown that short term reuse of modern fine gauge insulin needles does not meaningfully increase pain bruising infection or tissue damage. In blinded and crossover studies patients are often unable to tell whether a needle has been reused and pain scores do not reliably increase with reuse. Observational data also show that many people with diabetes routinely reuse needles in real world settings without clear adverse effects particularly when hygiene is good and needles are not visibly damaged.

    Veterinary medicine is in a very similar position. There is no good evidence that strict single use of insulin needles improves outcomes in stable diabetic dogs and cats. We also now have data from vaccination studies showing that small changes in needle sharpness that are measurable in vitro often do not translate into meaningful differences in patient comfort in vivo. Infection risk from subcutaneous insulin injections in pets appears to be very low particularly when sites are rotated and owners handle needles appropriately.

    Where I tend to land clinically is that I do not routinely encourage needle reuse because owner technique storage and consistency vary widely. However if a motivated capable owner is carefully reusing insulin needles with clean handling capping and replacement when a needle becomes dull bent or contaminated I am not particularly concerned and I do not see strong evidence that this practice is inherently unsafe. In my experience the far bigger risks to diabetic control are missed doses inconsistent technique anxiety around injections or dosing errors rather than needle reuse itself.

    Like many things in medicine this is probably best handled as an individualised discussion rather than a blanket rule.

    Hope that helps!

    Scott šŸ™‚

    scott@vtx-cpd.com
    Keymaster

    Hi Rosanna, great question!

    I hope all is going well with you!

    Emesis in cats is always a calculated gamble rather than a ā€œgo-toā€ intervention, and I think most of us now frame it as one option within a wider decontamination strategy rather than a default step. Success rates are variable, sedation is almost guaranteed with α2-agonists, and timing and toxin type matter.

    Medetomidine/dexmedetomidine are probably the most evidence-supported options we currently have. Older studies suggested reasonable success with dexmedetomidine around 7 µg/kg IM, but more recent work suggests that this is often sub-emetic and primarily sedating. The 2025 JFMS prospective study looking at medetomidine doses found the best balance of efficacy and side effects at 20 µg/kg IM, with a median time to emesis of ~5 minutes and no clear benefit to higher doses beyond increased sedation. Your experience with 10 µg/kg IM resulting in ā€œjust a sleepy catā€ fits very well with that data.

    There’s also increasing interest in oral/transmucosal α2-agonists. While the recent JFMS case series using oral dexmedetomidine (20 µg/kg) focused specifically on emesis, it’s worth remembering that the concept of oral α2-agonists in cats isn’t new. A JAVMA study back in 2000 demonstrated that orally administered α2-agonists (in combination with ketamine) reliably produced marked sedation, with vomiting and hypersalivation being the main adverse effects and relatively mild physiological disturbance. That older work supports the biological plausibility of oral/transmucosal dexmedetomidine causing both sedation and emesis, even if the modern application is more targeted.

    Hydromorphone is a reasonable alternative, with success rates around 70–75% in experimental settings and typically less profound sedation, but it’s less commonly stocked in general practice and still not reliably emetic.

    Neurological signs and ā€œshould we induce?ā€: This is the hardest part, and I don’t think there’s a single right answer. The traditional contraindication to emesis in patients with neurological signs is really about airway protection and aspiration risk, not the presence of neurological signs per se. The complicating factor in cats is that α2-agonists will cause sedation anyway, so you’re essentially deciding whether controlled, anticipated sedation with close monitoring is acceptable versus foregoing emesis altogether.

    In a cat that is already ataxic or mydriatic but still alert, responsive, normocardic, and able to maintain posture, I think it’s reasonable to consider emesis if:

    The ingestion is potentially life-threatening (eg, chocolate, acetaminophen, lilies),

    The timing is plausible for gastric decontamination,

    You can provide close monitoring, rapid reversal (atipamezole), and oxygen if needed.

    That said, the cannabis/chocolate case you describe is exactly where uncertainty bites. Unknown dose, unknown chocolate type, and a potentially long ingestion window all reduce the likelihood that emesis will meaningfully change outcome. In those situations, I’m increasingly inclined to prioritise early activated charcoal (with or without repeated dosing) once the cat is stable, rather than persisting with repeated emesis attempts that delay charcoal and add sedation.

    Take home:

    If attempting emesis with medetomidine, 20 µg/kg IM seems to be the sweet spot.

    Expect sedation; plan for reversal and monitoring.

    Neurological signs don’t automatically rule out emesis, but they should raise the threshold and shorten the leash on how long you try before moving on.

    If emesis doesn’t occur quickly, I stop and move to charcoal/supportive care rather than escalating doses.

    Out of interest, do you have other drugs available? Do you have dexmedetomidine in your practice?

    I hope that helps.

    Scott šŸ™‚

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 2,440 total)