Subpalpebral lavage placement for remote topical administration of ocular medications in 12 dogs: A retrospective review and assessment of owner perception.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the placement of subpalpebral lavage (SPL) systems in 12 dogs (15 eyes) intolerant of topical ocular medications to assess the suitability, complications encountered and owner perception of use. ANIMALS STUDIED: Retrospective review of dogs that underwent SPL placement for treatment of ocular disease at the Ophthalmology Department, University of Bristol Small Animal Hospital between 2017 and 2021. PROCEDURE(S): Data recorded included signalment, history, diagnosis, treatment, reason for SPL placement, uni- or bilateral placement, duration of placement, complications, and outcome. Owner perception was assessed using an online questionnaire. Statistical analysis included McNemar and Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests. RESULTS: Twelve dogs (15 eyes) underwent SPL placement. Eleven owners completed the online questionnaire. Corneal ulceration was the most common disease requiring SPL placement (n = 13/15 eyes, 86.7%). Most cases received multimodal topical therapy (n = 9/15 eyes, 60.0%) via SPL. Owners administered medication 6.63 times daily via SPL (range 1-16 applications/day). All dogs requiring ongoing topical medication (n = 8/12, 66.7%) were trained to accept direct administration during SPL treatment. Statistically significant improvements in medication compliance, ease of application, and reduced perceived risk of iatrogenic ocular injury were reported by owners (p-value = .001, .004, and .031 respectively). Minor complications were infrequently reported but an excellent outcome was achieved for all eyes. CONCLUSION: Subpalpebral lavage placement provides a practical and safe solution for the provision of frequent multimodal ocular medication when treating patients with a challenging temperament.

A prospective, masked, randomized, controlled superiority study comparing the incidence of corneal injury following general anesthesia in dogs with two methods of corneal protection.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of corneal injury during general anesthesia (GA) and the immediate post-operative period in eyes protected with topical ocular lubricant alone with eyes protected with topical lubricant followed by complete eyelid closure using tape. ANIMALS STUDIED: One hundred client-owned dogs (200 eyes) undergoing GA for MRI scan. METHODS: Patients had ocular lubricant applied to both eyes upon induction of anesthesia. One eye was taped closed immediately after induction for the duration of anesthesia using Strappal® tape (BSN medical™; treatment group), and the other eye was not taped (control group). Eyes were randomly allocated to a treatment group. Ophthalmic examination was performed before and after anesthesia; the examiner was masked to eye treatment groups. Corneal injury was defined as corneal ulceration or corneal erosion. A McNemar's test was used to compare the incidence of corneal injury between groups. A paired-samples t-test was used to compare Schirmer-1 tear test (STT-1) readings between groups. RESULTS: Sixteen eyes (8%) developed corneal erosion. No corneal ulceration occurred. There was no significant difference between incidence of corneal erosion between groups (p = .454). There was a significant decrease in STT-1 readings following GA in both groups (p < .001), with no significant difference in STT-1 between groups (p = .687). No adverse effects of taping the eye closed were observed. CONCLUSION: Taping the eyes closed during GA had no additional benefit to the lubrication protocol used in this study.

A description of blend electrolysis for treatment of canine distichiasis: 78 cases (2012-2017).

OBJECTIVE: To describe a population of dogs treated with blend electrolysis for distichiasis at The Royal Veterinary College and report the complications seen. METHODS: In part 1, records were reviewed from 2012 to 2017 and a population of 78 dogs with distichiasis treated using blend electrolysis (Sterex SX-B blend epilator) analysed. In part 2, 18 dogs treated with blend electrolysis were re-examined prospectively by a diplomate of the European College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists (ECVO). RESULTS: In part 1, brachycephalic breeds accounted for 62 per cent. English bulldog was the most common breed (42 per cent). In this population, 88 per cent of dogs were successfully treated with one treatment of electrolysis (successful treatment defined as resolution of clinical signs). Forty-five dogs had recurrent distichia on follow-up, mostly fine distichia without clinical discomfort. Twelve per cent required repeat electrolysis. Complications were infrequent: five dogs had scarring or hypopigmentation of the eyelid margin. In part 2, 18 dogs were re-examined. Ten had distichia recurrence, six had eyelid scarring and five had depigmentation associated with electrolysis. Two dogs had occasional clinical signs thought to be related to distichiasis. All owners perceived their dogs' ocular comfort to be improved following blend electrolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Brachycephalic breeds, most notably English bulldogs, are over-represented in this population. Blend electrolysis appears an effective treatment for resolution of clinical signs.