ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 95K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

PAPER
The anti-emetic efficacy of maropitant (Cerenia™) in the treatment of ongoing emesis caused by a wide range of underlying clinical aetiologies in canine patients in Europe
V. A. de la Puente-Redondo, E. M. Siedek, H. A. Benchaoui, N. Tilt, T. G. Rowan R. G. Clemence
Veterinary Medicine Research & Development, Pfizer Ltd, Sandwich, Kent CT13 9NJ
Copyright 2007 British Small Animal Veterinary Association

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The efficacy of maropitant (Cerenia™; Pfizer Inc.) as an anti-emetic for use in dogs with ongoing emesis was evaluated in a two-phase multi-centric study conducted at veterinary clinics in France, Italy, Slovakia and the UK.

Methods: In phase I, dogs with ongoing emesis were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either maropitant (32 dogs) or metoclopramide (34 dogs). In phase II, dogs were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to maropitant (77 dogs) or metoclopramide (40 dogs). Maropitant was administered subcutaneously at 1 mg/kg/day for up to five days. Metoclopramide was administered as recommended on the product labels as licensed at 0·5 to 1 mg/kg/day subcutaneously or orally with the daily dose divided over two to three administrations per day for up to three to five days.

Results: In phase I, 97 per cent of dogs treated with maropitant and 71 per cent of dogs treated with metoclopramide did not vomit after treatment (P<0·01). The mean number of emetic events after maropitant treatment was significantly reduced compared with that after metoclopramide treatment (P=0·01). In phase II, the occurrence of emesis was lower for maropitant during the first 24 hours (P<0·0001) and for each day thereafter.

Clinical Significance: A single daily dose of maropitant was more effective than metoclopramide administered two or three times daily in the treatment of emesis caused by various aetiologies in dogs.


Received: 20 December 2006; Accepted: 31 January 2007;
DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1748-5827.2006.00321.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Sign Up Now
Sign Up Now

Sign up for E-Alerts

Vet Updates on Twitter

Sign Up Now
 Journal of Small Animal Practice

Renew your Subscription for 2010!

Journal of Small Animal Practice

Sign up now

Join our mailing list!