B a cky ard Po u l t r y an d

Wat e r f o w l S e d a t i o n an d
Anesthesia
Christine Molter, DVM, Dipl. ACZMa,*,
André Escobar, DVM, MS, PhD, Dipl. CBAV (Anesthesiology)b,
Carrie Schroeder, DVM, Dipl. ACVAAc

KEYWORDS
 Anesthesia  Chicken  Duck  Poultry  Sedation  Waterfowl

KEY POINTS
 Anatomy for backyard poultry and waterfowl is similar to other avian species.
 Both injectable and inhalant anesthetic options are available for backyard species.
 The anesthetic plan should be balanced with the procedural and patient needs to have a
safe and successful event.

INTRODUCTION

Backyard poultry (chicken [Gallus gallus domesticus], turkey [Meleagris gallopavo

domesticus], helmeted guineafowl [Numida meleagris]) and waterfowl (ducks and
geese [Anatidae]) are rapidly expanding avian populations in the United States.1
One US Department of Agriculture study found that 0.8% of all households in the
United States own chickens and 4% of households without chickens were planning
to obtain them within 5 years.2 These birds are maintained as food for home use
(meat, eggs, or both), gardening partners (pest control, manure for fertilizer), pets,
or a combination.3 Veterinarians are presented with these animals for a variety of con-
ditions, commonly including trauma, lameness, and disease involving the reproduc-
tive, nervous, and gastrointestinal systems, which may require anesthesia to
properly diagnose and treat.4

The authors do not have any commercial or financial conflicts of interest or any funding sour-
ces to disclose.
a
Animal Health Department, Houston Zoo, Inc., 1513 Cambridge Street, Houston, TX 77030,
USA; b Department of Clinical Sciences, Ross University School of Veterinary Medicine, PO
Box 334, Basseterre, St. Kitts, West Indies; c Department of Surgical Sciences, University of
Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine, 2015 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected]

Vet Clin Exot Anim 25 (2022) 163–180

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvex.2021.08.004 vetexotic.theclinics.com
1094-9194/22/ª 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
164 Molter et al

SPECIES ANATOMIC PARTICULARITIES RELEVANT TO SEDATION AND OR

ANESTHESIA

The anatomy of backyard poultry and waterfowl is similar to that of other avian species
and this should be clinically considered. Most backyard species are highly terrestrial
and heavy bodied, and some domestic chicken breeds are also well muscled. For
intramuscular (IM) injections, the pectoral musculature is the most common site.
The pelvic limb musculature, although abundant in some, is generally not used to
avoid the sciatic nerve and associated vasculature, and to avoid partial elimination
of drugs by the renal portal system. For venipuncture, intravenous (IV) injections, or
IV catheter placement, the medial metatarsal and brachial (also called the ulnar or
wing) veins are reasonable options. Jugular veins may be used, although the right ju-
gular vein is often reserved for venipuncture, as it is larger than the left; other periph-
eral venous sites are more common for catheter placement. In obese domestic
chickens or turkeys, the jugular vein may be challenging to identify and profuse adi-
pose tissue may need to be manipulated away from the vessel for visualization. For
intraosseous catheter placement, the nonpneumatic distal ulna or tibiotarsus are op-
tions though in some species, like large domestic chickens, the greater bone density
makes placement more difficult.5
For endotracheal intubation and administration of volatile anesthetics, consider-
ations given to other birds should be applied to poultry and waterfowl. These species
have a glottis at the base of the tongue (Fig. 1), which may be set deep within the oral
cavity and require the use of a laryngoscope or transilluminator to visualize, and the
oral cavity may contain abundant thick, stringy saliva that needs to be removed
from the glottis before intubation and after extubation. The oral cavity is a favorable
location to evaluate mucous membrane color and the comb, when present in gallina-
ceous species, may be blanched to assess capillary refill time.6 The respiratory tract
consists of nares, a trachea with complete cartilaginous rings, a syrinx (where vocal-
izations are produced), and 2 lungs firmly attached to the dorsal body wall. Domestic
chickens have 9 air sacs, including paired cervical, cranial thoracic, caudal thoracic,
abdominal, and a single interclavicular air sac.7 The air sacs are not involved with sig-
nificant gas exchange, but do connect to the lungs and pneumatic bones, including
the humerus and femur. Care should be taken with injections in birds to avoid

Fig. 1. A domestic chicken under a surgical plane of anesthesia, ready for intubation and
with the oral cavity carefully opened. The glottis is in the center of the oropharynx at the
base of the tongue, ventrally.
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 165

improper needle placement into an air sac by aspirating to ensure no air enters the sy-
ringe before injection administration.
It is important to note that, as with other avian species, air sac cannulation may be
performed to provide oxygen supplementation and/or administration of inhalational
agents in the event of tracheal obstruction or difficulty in endotracheal intubation. In-
dications and techniques have been described elsewhere.
Obese domestic chickens, turkeys, and geese may have a tremendous amount of
coelomic adipose tissue that will reduce air sac space and potentially impede air
sac cannulation, and this should be taken into consideration before anesthesia. Obese
birds may become hyperthermic, dyspneic, tachypneic, or open-mouth breathe while
under stress, during manual restraint, or in warm conditions. Anxiolytic medication,
preoxygenation, and working in a temperature-controlled space will help to mitigate
the challenges of working with obese birds.
As birds do not have a diaphragm, respiration is mechanically driven by the move-
ment of the sternum and this should not be restricted during manual restraint or during
anesthesia. Auscultation of the lungs is best achieved with a stethoscope over the
dorsum between the wings and the air sacs over the caudal aspect of the keel. The
heart is 4-chambered, analogous to mammals, and located deep to the cranial aspect
of the sternum. Auscultation of the heart is best achieved with a stethoscope placed
over either side of the sternum. Alternatively, an esophageal stethoscope may be used
in large species under general anesthesia.
Most backyard poultry species have a crop, which may be quite large and pendu-
lous, particularly in domestic chickens and especially those with crop stasis or ileus.
The crop must be palpated before anesthesia and, if full, should be given time to
empty or the bird’s head kept elevated to prevent regurgitation and aspiration. Endo-
tracheal intubation will aide in protecting the airway as well. In general, birds do not
require fasting from food or water for more than 2 hours.

SEDATION AND PREMEDICATION

Advantages to preanesthetic sedation are numerous and include anxiolysis,

decreased requirement for induction agents and maintenance anesthetics, and
amnesia.8–12 Compared with nondomestic avian orders such as Psittaciformes,
poultry and some waterfowl are generally more placid and amenable to handling
and short-term restraint without significant stress responses. These species generally
lack tools for inducing significant harm on handlers and, in the case of pet poultry and
waterfowl, are often more forgiving for subsequent veterinary visits as compared with
parrots. However, despite the relative ease of veterinary care in poultry and waterfowl,
these animals are subject to stress responses as a result of perturbations in their
routine and environment, such as a trip to the veterinary clinic or a visit by a veteri-
narian. These perturbations can cause stress responses that induce adverse effects
ranging from changes in the leukogram on a complete blood cell count to dramatic in-
creases in heart rate, respiratory rate, and body temperature.13,14 As such, mitigation
of stress to the avian patient is of the utmost importance and sedation is a component
of this effort.
At the time of publication, there is a paucity of evidence for the efficacy of oral sed-
atives in avian patients. For instance, pigeons administered the serotonin receptor
antagonist and reuptake inhibitor, trazodone (30 mg/kg), via the oral route under
experimental conditions exhibited no sedation.15 For greater predictability of
response, parenteral means of sedation are typically recommended. IV access gener-
ally requires more significant handling and restraint and is, therefore, generally not
166 Molter et al

recommended unless an indwelling IV catheter is in place. Intramuscular administra-

tion is a commonly used route for administration of sedatives, offering a relatively pre-
dictable absorption and onset time. Pectoral muscles are commonly used to
potentially avoid the elimination of drugs by the renal portal system. Most poultry
and waterfowl are well muscled and of adequate size to tolerate IM administration
of a moderate volume.
The intranasal (IN) route of administration has been described in a number of bird
species and is an effective alternative to IM administration.8,16–20 This route offers
rapid uptake through the richly vascularized nasal cavity both through rapid absorp-
tion into the blood and along the olfactory and trigeminal nerves into the cerebral spi-
nal fluid.21 Onset is generally rapid, within 5 to 10 minutes, due to this direct route.
Advantages include avoidance of potential muscle trauma caused by injections,
increased ease of administration in poorly muscled or conditioned birds, and a poten-
tial for improved client/owner perception by administering sedatives less invasively.
Disadvantages include a need for increased restraint of the head, a limit to the total
volume of administration, potential for aerosolized drug exposure for those adminis-
tering the agent, and potential for incomplete administration or absorption. Both IM
and IN routes are effective means of administration and choice of route is often based
on individual circumstances and veterinarian preference.
Midazolam is a benzodiazepine that exerts sedation via facilitation of the inhibitory
actions of gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) at the GABAA receptor.12 The result is
anxiolysis, sedation, anterograde amnesia, and muscle relaxation of moderate dura-
tion. Midazolam is characterized by its favorable safety profile, with minimal adverse
effects on the cardiovascular or respiratory system as a sole agent. As with all benzo-
diazepines, midazolam exerts a synergistic effect with other sedative and anesthetic
agents, including opioids and alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist agents.12 Sedation
with midazolam via IM and IN routes has been extensively described in a variety of
avian species with overwhelmingly favorable results.8,16–20,22 For instance, IN admin-
istration of midazolam in the diving duck surf scoter (Melanitta perspicillata) before the
induction of general anesthesia with isoflurane resulted in a significantly increased
postsurgical survival.20 Preanesthetic administration of midazolam will not only reduce
the stress associated with anesthetic induction and recovery, but will decrease the
amount of inhalant needed for maintenance of anesthesia, as measured by minimal
anesthetic concentration (MAC) in birds. Intramuscular administration of midazolam
(1–2 mg/kg) in quaker parrots (Myiopsitta monachus) resulted in a dose-dependent
decrease in the MAC of isoflurane of 19% to 28%.10 Although the MAC of volatile an-
esthetics such as isoflurane and sevoflurane may vary widely (see the section Inhalant
Anesthetics), it can be expected that the preanesthetic administration of sedatives,
such as midazolam, will decrease the required concentration of inhaled anesthetic
in a dose-dependent manner. The pharmacokinetics of midazolam have been studied
with variable results.23 Based on these studies, as well as evaluations of the duration
of clinical sedation, the duration of midazolam is expected to be of brief to moderate
duration, lasting from 30 minutes to 2 hours. The dosage range in avian species is
large, and dosage should be based on allometric scaling, level of patient stress,
and the desired level of sedation. In general, a 1 to 2 mg/kg IM or IN dosage is a start-
ing point with most domestic poultry and waterfowl, but a range of up to 6 mg/kg has
been described.20,24
A distinct advantage of midazolam is the availability to antagonize sedative effects
with the benzodiazepine antagonist flumazenil.8,16,17,22 This agent can be adminis-
tered via IN or IM routes (0.01–0.1 mg/kg). Adverse effects are uncommon at clinical
dosages in most patients and have not been described in avian patients. Onset of
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 167

recovery is generally within approximately 10 minutes and the duration of flumazenil is

30 to 60 minutes.12 Because of the potential for the duration of the agonist to outlast
that of the antagonist, patients should be monitored for recurrence of sedation for 1 to
2 hours. Caution should be exercised to avoid access to submersible water and
elevated perches until recovery is complete from sedation, at least 2 hours.
When analgesia or an increased level of sedation is required, the addition of butor-
phanol is recommended. The combination of butorphanol and midazolam in cocka-
tiels resulted in a deeper level of sedation as compared with midazolam as a sole
agent,20 and this combination used in a variety of psittacines for preanesthetic seda-
tion resulted in a reduction in duration and an improvement in quality of anesthetic in-
duction with no adverse effects.25 It is important to note that the synergistic
combination of an opioid with a benzodiazepine may result in respiratory depression
in mammalian species. Although decreased respiratory rates have been reported20
under sedation, this is likely due to a decreased stress response rather than a true
decrease in minute ventilation. The administration of midazolam as a sole agent in
passerine birds did result in a modest increase and decrease in the partial pressures
of venous carbon dioxide and oxygen, respectively26; however, clinically significant
respiratory depression as evidenced by arterial blood gas tensions has not been
reported.
Naloxone is an opioid antagonist that will reverse the sedation of butorphanol and
has been described in mammals at 0.02 to 0.0.4 mg/kg; its use in avian species has
been described but not fully evaluated at the time of publication. Although in the
past butorphanol was considered the opioid of choice in birds, this concept has
been changing, and full-opioid agonists have been used when a higher level of anal-
gesia is required. The presence of m-opioid receptors has been described in the cen-
tral nervous system (CNS) of birds,27 including chickens,28 and it is expected that the
analgesic effect of those drugs is similar than those reported in mammals.
Although midazolam and butorphanol are the most commonly administered agents
for sedation in poultry and waterfowl, the use of alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonists
for sedation has been described in avian species.16–18,29 Alpha-2 adrenergic receptor
agonists have the potential to result in profound, dose-dependent sedation that may
be better suited for larger and more challenging-to-restrain birds such as ostrich (Stru-
thio sp.) or emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae). Significant bradycardia, increased sys-
temic vascular resistance, and decreased cardiac output are typical adverse effects
of these agents in mammalian species.30 Indeed, IN administration of dexmedetomi-
dine in pigeons resulted in significant sedation and restraint but was accompanied by
a significant decrease in heart rate (median 128 beats per minute).18 Although these
agents offer excellent sedation and chemical restraint that may be required under
certain circumstances, caution must be exercised with their administration, and car-
diovascular monitoring and supplemental oxygen should be available. Dexmedetomi-
dine is readily antagonized by atipamezole given via IM or IN routes. Dosing of
atipamezole is based on an agonist-antagonist ratio; atipamezole should be given
at an equal volume (based on usage of 0.5 mg/mL dexmedetomidine and 5 mg/mL
atipamezole) or at 10 times the agonist dose (eg, 1 mg atipamezole per 0.1 mg
dexmedetomidine).

INDUCTION

Anesthetic induction is a critical period that can be associated with increased odds of
anesthetic-related morbidity and mortality. Anesthesia-related mortality has been re-
ported to be higher in birds (3.6%) than in other animals, and the higher risk should be
168 Molter et al

informed to the owners.31 In chickens and waterfowl, adverse events such as excite-
ment, arrhythmias, hypothermia, hypotension, regurgitation and aspiration, endotra-
cheal tube obstruction, apnea, and sudden death have been reported during
general anesthesia.32–39
Preoxygenation is crucial to prevent hypoxemia in case apnea occurs during induc-
tion, although this should be avoided in cases of severe distress or stress due to po-
tential risk of arrhythmias associated with increased myocardial oxygen consumption.
Birds have minimal to absent functional residual capacity, and preoxygenation will in-
crease the time to oxygen desaturation. A variety of sizes and shapes of facemasks
should be readily available due to the differences in beak shapes (Fig. 2). Alternatively,
creatively adapted masks, such as syringe cases and plastic soda bottles sealed with
a stretched procedure glove or plastic bag containing a small slit in the center can be
used in waterfowl with long bills. Masks should contain the nares at the base of the
upper bill or completely enclose the head, and ideally should be made of a clear ma-
terial to visualize the nares to ensure they are not being obstructed and to monitor
eyelid closure (Fig. 3). Oxygen flow rates of at least 1 to 2 L/min are recommended
to guarantee high inspired fractions, especially if the mask is not appropriately sealed
around the bill. Preoxygenation with 100% oxygen should be done with caution in
breath-holding birds because apnea can occur when inspired fractions of oxygen
greater than 40% are used during induction, which is attributed to desensitization of
O2-chemoreceptors.31 In breath-holding birds, apnea and bradycardia also can occur
when placing pressure or a mask over their beaks due to the diving reflex.33 This reflex
is induced by stimulation of nasal receptors during forced dives, and is eliminated in
redhead ducks (Aythya Americana) by breathing 100% oxygen for at least 3 minutes.40
Although there is a higher risk of apnea in breath-holding birds, preoxygenation should
always be performed and airway equipment should be promptly available before in-
duction of anesthesia.
Placing a Doppler probe over the metatarsal artery in premedicated animals before
induction is recommended to monitor changes in heart rate and detect irregular pulses
associated with dysrhythmias (Fig. 4). Removing the feathers before placing the
Doppler probe increases the contact with the skin and improves the signal. Intubation
should be performed with uncuffed endotracheal tubes after birds show signs of a sur-
gical plane of anesthesia, including loss of palpebral, righting, and toe pinch

Fig. 2. A domestic chicken being manually restrained on a padded table with the wings
gently held against the body with care not to compress the keel. The beak, including the
nares, fits snuggly within a face mask for preoxygenation and inhalant anesthesia.
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 169

Fig. 3. A large and snug fitting face mask is used to fit over the beak of a domestic turkey.
Note that the nares are completely within the mask and are not obstructed.

withdrawal reflexes, and muscle relaxation of the wings and neck. A laryngoscope (eg,
size 0 Miller blade) or transilluminator should be used to assist with rapid and accurate
intubation (Fig. 5). A tracheal seal can be achieved using a Cole tracheal tube with in-
ner diameter 4 mm in chickens weighing between 1.5 and 2.5 kg.
Rebreathing circuits offer higher resistance to ventilation and should be avoided in
chickens and waterfowl weighing less than 5 kg during preoxygenation and anesthesia
under spontaneous ventilation. Mapleson D and Bain circuits are commonly used
because of their light weight and low mechanical dead space, which allow a rapid
adjustment of the fresh gas inflow and change in the anesthetic depth when inhalant
anesthetics are used.

INJECTABLE ANESTHETICS

Propofol is the most commonly used injectable anesthetic owing to its rapid and
smooth induction, and minimal accumulation in the body. In birds, the pharmacoki-
netics of propofol has only been described in great horned owls (Bubo virginianus)
and showed a rapid initial distributional half-life (1.5  0.6 minutes), slow elimination

Fig. 4. A Doppler probe is secured over the medial metatarsal artery to assess heart rate in a
domestic chicken.
170 Molter et al

Fig. 5. A domestic duck is intubated while being manually restrained in a surgical plane of
anesthesia. A laryngoscope is used to visualize the glottis and aid in rapid, accurate intuba-
tion with a noncuffed endotracheal tube.

half-life (40.7  14.2 minutes), and a low volume of distribution at steady state
(0.99  0.18 L/kg).41 However, extrapolating pharmacokinetic data to chickens and
waterfowl should be performed with caution because of differences in body compo-
sition, especially for drugs that are highly lipid soluble, and have a longer half-life
and volume of distribution in birds with higher body fat content.42
Studies describing induction of anesthesia with propofol in avian species have been
performed in non-premedicated animals and titration of the drug to effect is recommen-
ded to avoid profound cardiopulmonary depression. In mute swans (Cygnus olor), in-
duction with propofol (8 mg/kg IV) was smooth, and without signs of excitation or
apnea.43 In canvasback ducks (Aythya valisineria), propofol (10 mg/kg IV) provided a
smooth induction and induced apnea in most of the animals, but signs of excitation,
such as generalized tremors, paddling, and opisthotonos were observed. The propofol
induction dose was significantly different between males (9.2  1.6 mg/kg IV) and fe-
males (7.4  1.6 mg/kg IV) in spectacled eiders (Somateria fischeri).44 In chickens, in-
duction apnea was observed in some animals after administration of propofol (9 mg/
kg IV).39 In a different study, propofol induced arrhythmias in most chickens, and
when administered at 3 times the induction dose (6.8 mg/kg IV), all animals died,
demonstrating a relative low anesthetic index.45 Short-term apnea and a smooth induc-
tion were reported after administration of propofol (5 mg/kg IV) in turkeys.46 Overall, pro-
pofol may be used as an induction agent with caution. Dosages should be carefully
titrated to effect and patients should be closely monitored for adverse effects.
Alfaxalone is a neurosteroid that, similar to propofol, induces depression of the CNS
by stimulation of GABAA receptors.47 The biggest advantage of alfaxalone over propo-
fol is the ability to administer it as an IM sedative. The pharmacokinetics of alfaxalone
in birds have only been described in mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos), and the IM
bioavailability was greater than 100%.48 After IV administration, the volume of distri-
bution, total body clearance, and elimination half-life were 3  1.93 L/kg,
139  67 mL/kg/min, and 15  7.4 minutes, respectively.48 Administration of
10 mg/kg IV or IM in unpremedicated mallard ducks was associated with poor induc-
tion quality, especially when administered IM, as animals exhibited signs of muscle
spasms.48 In chickens, alfaxalone administration (5 mg/kg IV) induced signs of excita-
tion and muscle rigidity, and additional boluses (5–10 mg/kg IV) were required to
induce muscle relaxation and allow endotracheal intubation.49
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 171

Ketamine is a noncompetitive antagonist of NMDA receptors and also exerts ac-

tions on opioid, monoaminergic, and muscarinic receptors.47 Induction of anesthesia
can be performed with either IV or IM administration and should be combined with a
muscle relaxant, such as a benzodiazepine or an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist,
to avoid muscle stiffness and excitation. Ketamine can induce cardiac arrhythmias
and prolonged recoveries, and is not considered a good alternative to induce anes-
thesia in most avian species.33,50 Induction and maintenance with ketamine-
diazepam-xylazine has been described in chickens undergoing typhlectomy; howev-
er, ketamine doses may vary significantly depending of the route of administration,
and doses of the concomitant drugs.51,52 Sinus tachycardia and ventricular tachy-
cardia were observed in chickens anesthetized with medetomidine-midazolam-
ketamine and maintained with sevoflurane.53 Anesthetic-related deaths were reported
after administration of medetomidine-midazolam-ketamine in ducks and elegant-
crested tinamous (Eudromia elegans)33,50; these studies suggest that ketamine should
be avoided to induce anesthesia if other options are available.

INHALANT ANESTHETICS

Inhalant anesthetics are considered the drug of choice to induce and maintain anes-
thesia in avian species because of rapid and smooth induction, easy control of anes-
thetic depth, elimination with minimal reliance on metabolic pathways, and better
oxygenation provided by concurrent administration of oxygen.54 Sevoflurane may
be considered a superior induction option over isoflurane because its odor is less pun-
gent and it has a lower blood gas partition coefficient, which possibly allows a faster
induction; however, no significant differences in induction times were found between
isoflurane and sevoflurane in different avian species.55–57 Clinicians often choose an
inhalational agent based on individual circumstances and preference.
Induction can be performed using 2 different techniques. The first technique uses
small, incremental increases in the vaporizer settings of 0.5% every 30 seconds, to
a maximum of 5% isoflurane or 8% sevoflurane, until the bird becomes unconscious
and can be intubated. The second technique uses a fixed vaporizer concentration of
isoflurane (3.5%–5.0%) or sevoflurane (6.0%–8.0%) until the bird can be intubated. In
chickens, the induction time is significantly shorter when 5% isoflurane is used
(0.87  0.15 minutes) compared with 4% (2.37  0.18 minutes) or 3.5%
(5.83  0.33 minutes).58 Other studies reported a median induction time of 2 minutes
with 5% isoflurane,38,59 and 2 to 3 minutes when 5% sevoflurane60 was used in
chickens. In helmeted guineafowls induced with 8% sevoflurane, the median induction
time was 3 minutes.61 Studies with chickens and backyard fowl do not report induc-
tion apnea when inhalant anesthetics were used. It is important to note, however, that
premedication with sedatives or analgesics may significantly decrease the inhalant
anesthetic requirement and induction times. Regardless of preanesthetic sedation
level, birds should be closely monitored during induction of anesthesia to detect ap-
nea, bradycardia, and dysrhythmias.
Ducks are more sensitive to respiratory depression induced by inhalant anesthetics
and are more likely to become apneic during induction compared with chickens.62
This has been shown by the difference of the isoflurane respiratory anesthetic index
(AI) between ducks (1.65) and chickens (2.80).62,63 The isoflurane AI is calculated as
a ratio between the expired concentration necessary to induce apnea and its MAC;
higher AI values mean less respiratory depression is induced. It has been hypothe-
sized that breath-holding birds are more sensitive to apnea induced by inhalant anes-
thetics due to physiologic differences, such as enhanced oxygen storages and
172 Molter et al

production of energy via anaerobic metabolism.64 Most of the canvasback ducks

induced with isoflurane using the small increment technique developed apnea after
4.7  3.4 minutes and required assisted ventilation.33 When working with waterfowl,
it is important to anticipate unexpected periods of apnea and be prepared to endotra-
cheally intubate and administer positive-pressure ventilation as necessary.

MAINTENANCE

Fresh gas flow rates between 200 and 400 mL/kg per minute should be selected when
non-rebreathing circuits are used to avoid carbon dioxide rebreathing. Inspired frac-
tions of oxygen greater than 40% induced mild hypoventilation attributed to a reduc-
tion in tidal volume in pekin ducks (A platyrhynchos domestica) anesthetized with
isoflurane.65 Ventilatory support should be available when oxygen concentrations
greater than 21% are used. Mechanical ventilation is recommended for most cases,
especially anesthetic procedures longer than 1 hour. The peak inspiratory pressure
should not exceed 15 cm H2O in ducks and chickens and the respiratory rate should
be adjusted to maintain an ETCO2 between 30 and 40 mm Hg.
The effect of body position under isoflurane anesthesia has been assessed in rap-
tors, and, although dorsal recumbency results in greater compression of the lungs and
air sacs,66 it also resulted in lower dead space ventilation and higher tidal volume
compared with lateral recumbency.67 Nevertheless, raptors in dorsal recumbency
became progressively more hypercapnic compared with lateral recumbency, but
those results should be extrapolated with caution to chickens and waterfowls because
they have a relatively larger pectoral muscle mass. The amplitude of breathing in
chickens in dorsal recumbency is reduced by 40% to 50% compared with erect
posture,68 and careful attention should be paid to positioning, especially in more
heavily conditioned birds. Visual assessment should accompany monitoring of respi-
ratory rate and ETCO2 to aid in evaluation of an increase in respiratory effort with po-
sitional changes.

INJECTABLE ANESTHETICS

Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) may be required in a variety of clinical scenarios,

including open air sacs or open fractures of pneumatic bones. TIVA with propofol has
been reported in chickens at a rate of 0.81  0.15 mg/kg per minute.39 Administration
of methadone (6 mg/kg IM), nalbuphine (12.5 mg/kg IM), and fentanyl (30 mg/kg
loading dose, followed by 30 mg/kg per hour IV) reduced the propofol requirement
by 41% to 47%, 43% to 51%, and 8% to 17%, respectively. However, administration
of fentanyl was performed in the metatarsal vein and part of the drug could have been
eliminated by the renal portal system. In mute swans, a propofol constant rate infusion
of 0.85 mg/kg per minute IV provided adequate anesthesia without apnea. Administra-
tion of propofol may result in satisfactory and safe anesthesia of avian patients, but
careful titration to effect and judicious monitoring of cardiovascular and respiratory
parameters are keys to success.

INHALANT ANESTHETICS

The MAC (minimum anesthetic concentration) of an inhalant anesthetic is the dose

that prevents movement in 50% of the animals exposed to a supramaximal stimulation
and describes the difference in potency between agents and species. MAC values in
Galliformes and ducks are described in Table 1. It has been shown that opioids have a
short anesthetic-sparing effect in Galliformes. In helmeted guineafowls, butorphanol
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 173

Table 1
Minimum anesthetic concentration of isoflurane and sevoflurane in Galliformes and ducks

Sevoflurane,
Species Isoflurane, % %
Chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus)38,59,63,76–78 1.10–1.25  0.09–0.20 2.21  0.32
Helmeted guineafowl (Numida meleagris)61 — 2.90  0.10
Pekin duck (Anas platyrhynchos)62 1.30  0.23 —

(4 mg/kg IV) decreased the MAC of sevoflurane by 20% after 15 minutes of adminis-
tration, but this effect was insignificant after 30 minutes61; however, this dose and
route of administration induced ventricular fibrillation in 2 animals and was considered
unsafe.69 In chickens, methadone (6 mg/kg IM) reduced the isoflurane MAC by 30%
after 15 minutes of administration, but this effect was also insignificant after 30 mi-
nutes.59 Methadone induced occasional atrioventricular blocks and ventricular pre-
mature complexes, decreases in heart rate, and increases in systemic blood
pressure. The pharmacokinetics of methadone in chickens anesthetized with isoflur-
ane was characterized by a large volume of distribution at steady state (5.42 L/kg),
elimination half-life of 177 minutes, and an IM bioavailability of 79%.70 Fentanyl
(30 mg/kg IV over 1 minute) had the greatest anesthetic-sparing effect in chickens
and reduced the isoflurane MAC by 40% after 5 minutes of administration; however,
this effect was short-lived and no arrhythmias were observed.38 The authors suggest a
fentanyl loading dose of 20 to 30 mg/kg and a constant rate infusion of 20 to 30 mg/kg
per hour in chickens. Because opioids have shown to induce arrhythmias in different
MAC studies in birds,59,69,71 a slow IV loading dose or IM injections along with electro-
cardiogram (ECG) placement before the opioid administration is recommended.
Although opioids may induce a small, or no, MAC-sparing effect in birds, this effect
is not necessarily related to their analgesic effect.72 Tramadol, for example, did not
induce a MAC-sparing effect in a white-eyed parakeets (Psittacara leucophthalmus)
study,71 but it is an effective analgesic in Muscovy ducks (Cairina moschata
domestica).73

MONITORING

Immediately after endotracheal intubation, a capnometer should be connected to the

endotracheal tube to confirm intubation. Cardiovascular status can be assessed by
the presence of the capnograph wave, Doppler pulse sounds, and cardiac ausculta-
tion. An appropriate anesthetic depth is characterized by loss of jaw tone, palpebral
and toe pinch withdrawal reflexes, presence of corneal reflex, and adequate muscle
relaxation. Sudden bradycardia during anesthesia indicates a profound anesthetic
depth, which can be associated with administration of MAC-sparing drugs, hypother-
mia, and hypovolemia.
Heart rate and rhythm can be monitored using cardiac auscultation, Doppler flow
probe, pulse oximeter, or an ECG (Figs. 6 and 7). Heart rate and mean arterial blood
pressure of gallinaceous birds and waterfowl, anesthetized under 1 MAC of isoflurane
or sevoflurane, range between 150 and 300 beats per minute and 80 to 140 mm Hg,
respectively.59,61,62 Blood pressure can be assessed directly by placing a catheter in
the ulnar or brachial artery, or indirectly using a Doppler flow probe coupled with a
sphygmomanometer. Systolic blood pressure measured using the Doppler method
should be interpreted with caution, as it can be underestimated in birds.74
174 Molter et al

Fig. 6. A pulse oximeter may be secured to various nonfeathered portions of a bird’s body,
including the toe, as pictured here.

Birds have nucleated red blood cells and pulse oximetry underestimates values of
oxygen saturation due to a greater absorption ratio.75 However, observation of oxygen
saturation trends is still valuable, and placement of the pulse oximeter is a simple and
practical monitoring tool. Pulse oximetry probes may be placed on a variety of sites,
dependent on the size of the bird. Transmittance-style (“clamp”) probes may be
placed on toes, combs, or wattles; caution is advised against placement on the tongue

Fig. 7. A Doppler probe is secured against the ulnar artery using a tongue depressor on the
inner aspect of the wing of a domestic turkey.
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 175

because of the risk of tongue necrosis. Reflectance-style (“flat”) probes, depending on

the probe size, may be placed against any pulsatile vascular bed, in the dorsal
oropharynx, or, cautiously, in the cloaca.
Body temperature should be measured using an esophageal thermometer and at-
tempts to maintain normothermia using a warm water blanket, radiation lamp, and
forced-air warming devices should be done immediately after induction. Hypothermia
can lead to arrhythmias, profound anesthetic depth, and may substantially prolong the
recovery and extubation times.

RECOVERY

Recovery is a sensitive stage of anesthesia that should be monitored closely to avoid

self-injury from emergence delirium and flopping behavior. Manual restraint or gently
wrapping the bird with a towel can prevent this behavior. Excitation and opisthotonos
has been reported in chickens and mute swans recovering from propofol.39,43 In
ducks, propofol provided a smooth recovery, and with isoflurane they tended to strug-
gle.33 Extubation times in Galliformes anesthetized with isoflurane or sevoflurane
administered a single dose of butorphanol (2–4 mg/kg IV), fentanyl (10–30 mg/kg IV)
or methadone (3 mg/kg IM) were an average of 5 minutes; however, higher doses of
methadone (6 mg/kg IM) increased the extubation time to more than 20 minutes.38,59,61
Regurgitation has been reported in chickens anesthetized with isoflurane, and recov-
ery in sternal recumbency is suggested to avoid aspiration.59

SUMMARY

As with any other species, a balanced and well-informed approach to sedation and
general anesthesia in backyard poultry and waterfowl is critical to ensure a safe and
successful procedure. Anatomy in these species is similar to other birds and there
are multiple injectable and inhalant anesthetic options that should be carefully
considered.

REFERENCES

1. Centers for Disease Control. Backyard poultry. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/

healthypets/pets/farm-animals/backyard-poultry.html. Accessed February 6,
2021.
2. United States Department of Agriculture. Urban chicken ownership in four U.S.
cities. Available at: https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/ipd/frostonchickens/
exhibits/show/backyardchickens/usdaresearchbackyard. Accessed February 6,
2021.
3. Elkhoraibi C, Blatchford RA, Pitesky ME, et al. Backyard chickens in the United
States: a survey of flock owners. Poult Sci 2014;93(11):2920–31.
4. Vaught ME, Gladden JN, Rozanski EA, et al. Reasons for evaluation on an emer-
gency basis of and short-term outcomes for chickens from backyard flocks: 78
cases (2014-2017). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2019;254(10):1196–203.
5. Heard D. Anesthesia. In: Speer BL, editor. Current therapy in avian medicine and
surgery. 1st edition. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier; 2016. p. 601–15.
6. Khamas W, Rutllant-Labeaga J, Greenacre CB. Physical examination, anatomy,
and physiology. In: Greenacre CB, Morishita TY, editors. Backyard poultry med-
icine and surgery: a guide for veterinary practitioners. Hoboken, New Jersey:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc; 2015. p. 95–116.
176 Molter et al

7. O’Malley B. Avian anatomy. In: O’Malley B, editor. Clinical anatomy and physi-
ology of exotic species: structure and function of mammals, birds, reptiles, and
amphibians. Philadelphia: Saunders Ltd; 2005. p. 97–161.
8. Mans C, Guzman DSM, Lahner LL, et al. Sedation and physiologic response to
manual restraint after intranasal administration of midazolam in Hispaniolan
Amazon parrots (Amazona ventralis). J Avian Med Surg 2012;26(3):130–9.
9. Concannon KT, Dodam JR, Hellyer PW. Influence of mu- and kappa-opioid
agonist on isoflurane minimal anesthetic concentration in chickens. Am J Vet
Res 1995;56(6):806–11.
10. Zaheer OA, Sanchez A, Beaufrere H. Minimum anesthetic concentration of isoflur-
ane and sparing effect of midazolam in Quaker parrots (Myiopsitta monachus).
Vet Anaesth Analg 2020;47(3):341–6.
11. Gilbert DB, Patterson TA, Rose SP. Midazolam induces amnesia in a simple, one-
trial maze-learning task in young chicks. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1989;34(2):
439–42.
12. Rathmell JP, Rosow CE. Intravenous sedatives and hypnotics. In: Flood P,
Rathmell JP, Shafer S, et al, editors. Stoelting’s pharmacolgy and physiology in
anesthetic practice. 5th edition. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2014.
p. 160–203.
13. Greenacre CB, Lusby AL. Physiologic responses of Amazon parrots (Amazona
species) to manual restraint. J Avian Med Surg 2004;18(1):19–22.
14. Blas J. Stress in birds. In: Scanes CG, editor. Sturkie’s avian physiology. 6th edi-
tion. Waltham: Academic Press; 2015. p. 769–810.
15. Desmarchelier MR, Beaudry F, Ferrek ST, al at. Determination of the pharmacoki-
netics of a single oral dose of trazodone and its effect on the activity level of do-
mestic pigeons (Columba livia). Am J Vet Res 2019;80(1):102–9.
16. Vesel N, Eskandari MH. Sedative effects of midazolam and xylazine with and
without ketamine and detomidine alone following intranasal administration in
ring-necked parakeets. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228(3):383–8.
17. Vesal N, Zare P. Clinical evaluation of intranasal benzodiazepines, alpha-
agonists, and their antagonists in canaries. Vet Anaesth Analg 2006;33(3):143–8.
18. Hornak S, Liptak T, Ledecky V, et al. A preliminary trial of the sedation induced by
intranasal administration of midazolam alone or in combination with dexmedeto-
midine and reversal by atipamezole for a short-term immobilization in pigeons.
Vet Anaesth Analg 2015;42(2):192–6.
19. Doss GA, Fink DM, Mans C. Assessment of sedation after intranasal administra-
tion of midazolam and midazolam-butorphanol in cockatiels (Nymphicus hollan-
dicus). Am J Vet Res 2018;79(12):1246–52.
20. Net RL, Mulcahy DM, Santamaria-Bouvier A, et al. Intranasal administration of
midazolam hydrochloride improves survival in female surf scoters (Melanitta per-
spicillata) surgically implanted with intracoelomic transmitters. J Zoo Wildl Med
2019;50(1):167–75.
21. Crowe TP, Greenlee MHW, Kanthasamy AG, et al. Mechanism of intranasal drug
delivery to the brain. Life Sci 2018;195:44–52.
22. Day TK, Roge CK. Evaluation of sedation in quail induced by use of midazolam
and reversed by use of flumazenil. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;209(5):969–71.
23. Cortright KA, Wetzlich SE, Craigmill AL. Plasma pharmacokinetics of midazolam
in chickens, turkeys, pheasants, and bobwhite quail. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 2007;
30(5):429–36.
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 177

24. Martel A, Mans C, Doss GA, et al. Effects of midazolam and midazolam-
butorphanol on gastrointestinal transit time and motility in cockatiels (Nymphicus
hollandicus). J Avian Med Surg 2018;32(4):286–93.
25. Kubiak M, Roach L, Eatwell K. The influence of a combined butorphanol and mid-
azolam premedication on anesthesia on anesthesia in psittacid species. J Avian
Med Surg 2016;30(4):317–23.
26. Heatley JJ, Cary J, Kingsley L, et al. Midazolam sedates Passeriformes for field
sampling but affects multiple venous blood analytes. Vet Med (Auckl) 2015;
6:61–9.
27. Khurshid N, Agarwal V, Iyengar S. Expression of mu- and delta-opioid receptors
in song control regions of adult male zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata). J Chem
Neuroanat 2009;37(3):158–69.
28. Csillag A, Bourne RC, Stewart MG. Distribution of mu, delta, and kappa opioid
receptor binding sites in the brain of the one-day-old domestic chick (Gallus do-
mesticus): an in vitro quantitative autoradiographic study. J Comp Neurol 1990;
302(3):543–51.
29. Santangelo B, Ferrari D, Di Martino I, et al. Dexmedetomidine chemical restraint
of two raptor species undergoing inhalation anesthesia. Vet Res Commun 2009;
33(Supl 1):209–11.
30. Murrell JC, Hellebreker LJ. Medetomidine and dexmedetomidine: a review of car-
diovascular effects and antinociceptive properties in the dog. Vet Anaesth Analg
2005;32(3):117–27.
31. Seamon AB, Hofmeister EH, Divers SJ. Outcome following inhalation anesthesia
in birds at a veterinary referral hospital: 352 cases (2004–2014). J Am Vet Med
Assoc 2017;251(7):814–7.
32. Ludders JW. Minimal anesthetic concentration and cardiopulmonary dose-
response of halothane in ducks. Vet Surg 1994;21(4):319–24.
33. Machin KL, Caulkett NA. Evaluation of isoflurane and propofol anesthesia for in-
traabdominal transmitter placement in nesting female canvasback ducks. J Wildl
Dis 2000;36(2):324–34.
34. Mulcahy DM. Free-living waterfowl and shorebirds. In: West G, Heard D,
Caulkett N, editors. Zoo animal and wildlife immobilization and anesthesia.
Ames: Willey Blackwell; 2014. p. 481–505.
35. Naganobu K, Hagio M, Sonoda T, et al. Arrhythmogenic effect of hypercapnia in
ducks anesthetized with halothane. Am J Vet Res 2001;62(1):127–9.
36. Brenner DJ, Larsen RS, Pascoe PJ, et al. Somatosensory evoked potentials and
sensory nerve conduction velocities in the thoracic limb of mallard ducks (Anas
platyrhynchos). Am J Vet Res 2008;69(11):1476–80.
37. O’Kane PM, Connerton IF, White KL. Pilot study of long-term anaesthesia in broiler
chickens. Vet Anaesth Analg 2016;43(1):72–5.
38. Rocha RW, Escobar A, Pypendop BH, et al. Effects of a single intravenous bolus
of fentanyl on the minimum anesthetic concentration of isoflurane in chickens
(Gallus gallus domesticus). Vet Anaesth Analg 2017;44(3):546–54.
39. Santos ER, Monteiro ER, Herrera JR, et al. Total intravenous anesthesia in domes-
tic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) with propofol alone or in combination with
methadone, nalbuphine or fentanyl for ulna osteotomy. Vet Anaesth Analg 2020;
47(3):347–55.
40. Furilla RA, Jones DR. The contribution of nasal receptors to the cardiac response
to diving in restrained and unrestrained redhead ducks (Aythya Americana).
J Exp Biol 1986;121:227–38.
178 Molter et al

41. Hawkins MG, Wright BD, Pascoe PJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics and anesthetic and
cardiopulmonary effects of propofol in red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) and
great horned owls (Bubo virginianus). Am J Vet Res 2003;64(6):667–83.
42. Pascoe PJ, Pypendop BH, Pavez Phillips JC, et al. Pharmacokinetics of fentanyl
after intravenous administration in isoflurane-anesthetized red-tailed hawks (Bu-
teo jamaicensis) and Hispaniolan Amazon parrots (Amazona ventralis). Am J
Vet Res 2018;79(6):606–13.
43. Muller K, Holzapfel J, Brunnberg L. Total intravenous anesthesia by boluses or by
continuous rate infusion of propofol in mute swans (Cygnus olor). Vet Anaesth An-
alg 2011;38(4):286–91.
44. Mulcahy DM, Tuomi P, Larsen S. Differential mortality of male spectacled eiders
(Somateria fisheri) and kind eiders (Somateria spectabilis) subsequent to anes-
thesia with propofol, bupivacaine and ketoprofen. J Avian Med Surg 2003;
17(3):117–23.
45. Lukasik VM, Gentz EJ, Erb HN, et al. Cardiopulmonary effects of propofol anes-
thesia in chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Avian Med Surg 1997;
11(2):93–7.
46. Schumacher J, Citino SB, Hernandes K, et al. Cardiopulmonary and anesthetic
effects of propofol in wild turkeys. Am J Vet Res 1997;58(9):1014–7.
47. Berry SH. Injectable anesthetics. In: Grimm KA, Lamont LA, Tranquilli WJ, et al,
editors. Veterinary anesthesia and analgesia. The fifth edition of Lumb and Jones.
Ames: Willey Blackwell; 2015. p. 277–96.
48. Kruse TN, Messenger KM, Bowman AS, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmaco-
dynamics of alfaxalone after a single intramuscular or intravascular injection in
mallard ducks (Anas platyrhynchos). J Vet Pharmacol Therap 2019;42(6):713–21.
49. White DM, Martinez-Taboada F. Induction of anesthesia with intravenous alfaxo-
lone in two Isa Brown chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Exot Pet Med
2019;29:119–22.
50. Ronaldson HJ, Monticelli P, Cuff AR, et al. Anesthesia and anesthetic-related
complications of 8 elegant-crested tinamous (Eudromia elegans) undergoing
experimental surgery. J Avian Med Surg 2020;34(1):17–25.
51. Maiti SK, Tiwary R, Vasan P, et al. Xylazine, diazepam and midazolam premedi-
cated ketamine anaesthesia in White Leghorn cockerels for typhlectomy. J S Afr
Vet Assoc 2006;77(1):12–8.
52. Mostachio GQ, de-Oliveira LD, Carciofi AC, et al. The effects of anesthesia with a
combination of intramuscular xylazine–diazepam–ketamine on heart rate, respira-
tory rate and cloacal temperature in roosters. Vet Anaesth Analg 2008;35(3):
232–6.
53. Celik Y, Atalan G, Gune V, et al. Use of medetomidine, midazolam, ketamine, and
sevoflurane as an anesthetic protocol for domestic chickens. Vet Mex 2020;
7(1):1–12.
54. Ludders JW. Inhaled anesthesia for birds. In: Gleed R, Ludders JW, editors.
Recent advances in veterinary anesthesia and analgesia: companion animals. In-
ternational Veterinary Information Service; 2001. Available at: https://www.ivis.
org/library/recent-advances-veterinary-anesthesia-and-analgesia-companion-
animals. Accessed April 1, 2021.
55. Joyner PH, Jones MP, Ward D, et al. Induction and recovery characteristics and
cardiopulmonary effects of sevoflurane and isoflurane in bald eagles. Am J Vet
Res 2008;69(1):13–22.
 Backyard Poultry and Waterfowl Anesthesia 179

56. Granone TD, de Francisco ON, Killos MD, et al. Comparison of three different
inhalant anesthetic agents (isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane) in red-tailed
hawks (Buteo jamaicensis). Vet Anaesth Analg 2012;39(1):29–37.
57. Chan FT, Chang GR, Wang HC, et al. Anesthesia with isoflurane and sevoflurane
in the crested serpent eagle (Spilornis cheela hoya): minimum anesthetic con-
centration, physiological effects, hematocrit, plasma chemistry and behavioral ef-
fects. J Vet Med Sci 2013;75(12):1591–600.
58. Deori P, Sarma KK, Nath PJ, et al. Physiological alteration, quality of anesthesia
and economy of isoflurane in domestic chickens (Gallus domesticus). Vet World
2017;10(5):493–7.
59. Escobar A, da Rocha RW, Pypendop BH, et al. Effects of methadone on the min-
imum anesthetic concentration of isoflurane, and its effects on heart rate, blood
pressure and ventilation during isoflurane anesthesia in hens (Gallus gallus do-
mesticus). PLOS One 2016;11(3):e0152546.
60. Naganobu K, Ise K, Miyamoto T, et al. Sevoflurane anesthesia in chickens during
spontaneous and controlled ventilation. Vet Rec 2003;152(2):45–8.
61. Escobar A, Valadao CA, Brosnan RJ, et al. Effects of butorphanol on the minimum
anesthetic concentration of sevoflurane in guineafowl (Numida meleagris). Am J
Vet Res 2012;73(2):183–8.
62. Ludders JW, Mitchell GS, Rode J. Minimal anesthetic concentration and cardio-
pulmonary dose response of isoflurane in ducks. Vet Surg 1990;19(4):304–7.
63. Midon M, Escobar A, Yamada DI, et al. Isoflurane respiratory anesthetic index in
chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Zoo Wildl Med 2021;52(1):327–31.
64. Butler PJ, Jones DR. Physiology of diving of birds and mammals. Physiol Rev
1997;77(3):837–99.
65. Seaman GC, Ludders JW, Erb HN, et al. Effects of low and high fractions of
inspired oxygen on ventilation in ducks anesthetized with isoflurane. Am J Vet
Res 1994;55(3):395–8.
66. Malka S, Hawkins MC, Jones JH, et al. Effect of body position on respiratory sys-
tem volumes in anesthetized red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) as measured
via computed tomography. Am J Vet Res 2009;70(9):1155–60.
67. Hawkins MG, Malka S, Pascoe PJ, et al. Evaluation of the effects of dorsal versus
lateral recumbency on the cardiopulmonary system during anesthesia with iso-
flurane in red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis). Am J Vet Res 2013;74(1):136–43.
68. King AS, Payne DC. Normal breathing and the effects of posture in Gallus domes-
ticus. J Physiol 1964;174:340–7.
69. Escobar A, Valadao CA, Brosnan RJ, et al. Cardiopulmonary effects of butorpha-
nol in sevoflurane-anesthetized guineafowl (Numida meleagris). Vet Anaesth An-
alg 2014;41(3):284–9.
70. Escobar A, Barletta M, Pypendop BH, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacody-
namics of methadone administered intravenously and intramuscularly to
isoflurane-anesthetized chickens. Am J Vet Res 2021;82(3):181–8.
71. Escobar A, da Rocha RW, Midon M, et al. Effects of tramadol on the minimum
anesthetic concentration of isoflurane in white-eyed parakeets (Psittacara leu-
cophthalmus). J Zoo Wildl Med 2017;48(2):380–7.
72. Brosnan RJ, Pypendop BH, Siao KT, et al. Effects of remifentanil on measures of
anesthetic immobility and analgesia in cats. Am J Vet Res 2009;70(9):1065–71.
73. Bailey RS, Sheldon JD, Allender MC. Analgesic efficacy of tramadol compared
with meloxicam in ducks (Cairina moschata domestica) evaluated by ground-
reactive forces. J Avian Med Surg 2019;33(2):133–40.
180 Molter et al

74. Zehnder AM, Hawkings MG, Pascoe PJ, et al. Evaluation of indirect blood pres-
sure monitoring in awake and anesthetized red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis):
effect of cuff size placement, and monitoring equipment. Vet Anaesth Analg
2009;36(5):464–79.
75. Schmitt PM, Gobel T, Trautvetter E. Evaluation of pulse oximetry as a monitoring
method in avian anesthesia. J Avian Med Surg 1998;12(2):91–9.
76. Naganobu K, Hagio M. Dose-related cardiovascular effects of isoflurane in
chickens during controlled ventilation. J Vet Med Sci 2000;62:435–7.
77. Naganobu K, Fujisawa Y, Ohde H, et al. Determination of the minimum anesthetic
concentration and cardiovascular dose response for sevoflurane in chickens dur-
ing controlled ventilation. Vet Surg 2000;29:102–5.
78. Martin-Jurado O, Vogt R, Kutter AP, et al. Effect of inhalation of isoflurane at end-
tidal concentrations greater than, equal to, and less than the minimum anesthetic
concentration on bispectral index in chickens. Am J Vet Res 2008;69:1254–61.