View all veterinary jobs
VetSurgeon.org publishes a curated feed of veterinary news for practising veterinary surgeons, with a primary focus on the UK profession.
We select stories based on their practical relevance, clinical interest, or professional significance — filtering out noise so busy vets can stay informed quickly.
Our coverage includes:
We report across all areas of practice, including companion animal, farm, equine and exotic species.
Our editorial approach is deliberately selective and concise. We prioritise clarity and relevance over volume, aiming to make each story worth your time.
You can follow VetSurgeon News by subscribing to the daily, weekly or monthly email digest, or via our channels on Facebook and LinkedIn.
Ms Wicksteed faced five charges.
The first charge concerned her conviction in May 2021, following a jury trial at Oxford Crown Court, for one count of theft and two counts of fraud for which she was sentenced to a two-year community order, including 150 hours of unpaid work, and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £2,800, £177.07 to Barclays Bank and £85 as a victims’ surcharge.
She admitted this charge at the outset of the RCVS Disciplinary Committee hearing.
The second charge concerned the allegation that, in October 2015, she was made subject to an ‘adult restorative disposal’ (‘ARD’) following thefts from Tesco Extra Stores.
This charge was found proven after Ms Wicksteed admitted in her evidence to the Committee that she had signed the ARD.
The third charge concerned the allegation that, in January 2018, she stole from a Debenhams department store and, in March that year, was given a formal police caution.
This charge was found proven by the Committee.
The fourth charge was that, in her annual renewal declarations made each year with the RCVS from 2016 through 2021, she had failed to declare the ARD and the caution.
However, under the Code of Professional Conduct, veterinary surgeons are not required to declare ARDs as they are not convictions, cautions or adverse findings.
Ms Wicksteed was therefore cleared of failing to declare her ARD.
Nevertheless, the Committee found that she had failed to declare her police caution in her annual renewal declarations.
The fifth charge was that in failing to make declarations upon renewing her registration, she was dishonest, misleading and had failed to take adequate steps to inform the College of the caution and the ARD.
The Committee found this charge proven in respect of the caution only and not the ARD.
The Committee then considered whether the first charge, which Ms Wicksteed admitted, rendered her unfit to practise, and whether the remaining charges that were found proven amounted to serious professional misconduct.
Judith Way, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee noted that the conviction concerned three elements of dishonesty: theft and two counts of fraud.
"It involved stealing from a junior colleague at work, and the fraudulent activity – the use of the colleague’s card - was carefully planned in that, when it was used, it was in respect of items which did not cumulatively cost in excess of £30 and therefore did not require knowledge of the card holder’s PIN.
"It was used twice in the Tesco Store. Between those times, Ms Wicksteed changed her appearance by taking off her coat and waited some 20 minutes.”
She added: “The Committee accepted the College’s argument that members of the public would find it abhorrent for a member of the profession to have acted in this way – stealing from a junior colleague a card held under a Power of Attorney for her brother, and spending money using that card, deliberately keeping each transaction under the contactless limit to try to conceal the conduct.
"Honesty and integrity is one of the five key principles which must be maintained by members of the profession.”
The Committee found that this charge alone rendered Ms Wicksteed unfit to practise veterinary surgery.
The Committee also found that the proven elements of the remaining charges amounted to serious professional misconduct, both individually and cumulatively.
The Committee then considered the sanction for Ms Wicksteed.
In terms of aggravating factors, the Committee considered that there was actual harm to a vulnerable person in the case of the conviction for theft and fraud, the misconduct and dishonesty it entailed was repeated, there were elements of premeditation in the conduct, there was inadequate insight shown into her behaviour, and there was wilful disregard of the College and its processes.
In terms of mitigation, the Committee considered supportive statements and character references from professional colleagues and clients and accepted that there was no actual or potential harm to animals, that Ms Wicksteed had a hitherto unblemished career as demonstrated by the references, and that there had been a significant lapse of time since some of the elements of the charges, albeit she had not declared them.
The Committee also accepted that Ms Wicksteed had suffered from ill-health, although had not seen evidence that directly connected her health with the dishonest behaviour.
Taking into account all the factors, the Committee decided that removal from the Register was the appropriate and proportionate sanction, referencing Ms Wicksteed’s breaches in relation to: serious departure from and reckless disregard for the professional behaviours set out in the Code of Professional Conduct; causing serious harm to the public and breach of trust; persistent and concealed dishonesty; and persistent lack of insight into the seriousness of her conduct.
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
This new injectable fluralaner formulation is approved for the immediate and persistent killing of fleas for one year (Ctenocephalides felis and Ctenocephalides canis), from 3 days to 12 months after treatment for the ticks Ixodes ricinus, and Dermacentor reticulatus, from 4 days to 12 months after treatment for Rhipicephalus sanguineus, and from 7 days to 12 months after treatment for Ixodes hexagonus.
MSD says it will also reduce the risk of Babesia canis via transmission by Dermacentor reticulatus from day 3 after treatment for up to 12 months, and also reduces the risk of infection with Dipylidium caninum via transmission by Ctenocephalides felis for up to 12 months.
Victoria Miles, UK Companion Animal Business Unit Director, MSD Animal Health said: “Imagine not having to worry about flea and tick protection for a whole year."
Bravecto 150 mg/ml powder and solvent for suspension for injection for dogs can be administered to dogs and puppies six months of age and older.
The product is already available in France and Germany and MSD told VetSurgeon.org that stocks are expected in the UK in September, for which the company is now taking pre-orders.
Contact your MSD Account Manager for further information on pricing.
The procedure was performed on a 13-year-old Siberian Husky called Marigold, which was diagnosed with a malignant mammary tumour last year.
Unfortunately, despite £20,000 worth of radiotherapy, Marigold failed to respond to treatment, and the tumour spread.
Marigold’s owner, Mrs Norma Pophosherti from Derby said: “We couldn’t bear to part with Marigold, she’s one of the family, so when we heard about the groundbreaking work being done at the University of Bromsgrove Veterinary School, we had to give it a go."
Unfortunately there was no realistic prospect of a donor from a matching breed of dog.
Thankfully, though, a local man with a 4-year-old Labrador stepped forward to help.
Hit by the cost of living crisis, he’d been unable to afford to keep his dog and was about to have it put to sleep when he heard about the Phophosherti family’s search for a donor.
Although he wished to remain anonymous, he said: “It gives me great comfort to think that Buddy will be able to live on, and spare the Phophoshertis from the pain of losing their beloved Marigold”
Professor Flora Olip MRCVS led a team of 6 veterinary surgeons who undertook the 28 hour procedure, which is estimated to have cost over £100,000.
She said: “This was a very tricky procedure which probably only had a 30% chance of success.
"But I’m delighted to say that Marigold’s new body has taken well, and she can now look forward to perhaps a whole more year with Phophosherti family, albeit as less of a Siberian Husky, and more of what you might call a Huskador"
Flora added: “More importantly, this heralds the way for similar procedures in humans, which I think are probably just a few years away now.”
Photo: Marigold, now one-third Siberian Husky, two-thirds Labrador.
Two new campaigns which call on the veterinary profession to unite against the practice of homeopathy have been launched this week.
Both campaigns raise concerns about the ethics of veterinary surgeons using irrational, unscientific and ineffective remedies to treat ill animals or in place of conventional vaccinations.
The Campaign For Rational Veterinary Medicine presents the case against homeopathy on a new microsite, and asks the profession to unite around a call for the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons to issue a public position statement that homeopathy is ineffective in animals, bringing it into line with the NHS, the findings of the British government's own review of homeopathy, and the BVA.
The campaign also asks that veterinary surgeons who prescribe homeopathic remedies be required to get owners to sign a consent form, prepared by the College, giving the College’s views on the ineffectiveness of homeopathy.
Lastly, the campaign asks that promotion or advertising of homeopathy by veterinary surgeons should abide by Advertising Standards Authority regulations and carry a statement from the College.
The Campaign for Rational Veterinary Medicine has been set up by a group of practitioners including the BSAVA Past President, Mike Jessop, Alex Gough, Martin Whitehead, Niall Taylor, Phil Hyde, Martin Atkinson and Brennen McKenzie, supported by VetSurgeon.org Editor, Arlo Guthrie. It also has the support of the noted author, academic and erstwhile dog owner, Professor Edzard Ernst.
Arlo said: "This is not just about the ethics of prescribing or tolerating the practice of prescribing water to animals that are dependent on us. There are 13m pet owning households in the UK. As well as visiting the vet, they will all be patients at some stage in their lives. So what you and the College say about homeopathy in animals has the potential to affect the choices they make for themselves too. Think how much money and false hope you could save them, and the consequent benefit to human welfare."
By complete coincidence, another campaign against veterinary homeopathy was launched last week. This one, by Danny Chambers MRCVS goes further, calling for a complete ban on the prescription of homeopathic remedies by veterinary surgeons. The petition has already gathered over 750 supporters.
Arlo said: "I think it’s important to say that the two petitions are not mutually exclusive. If you think both represent acceptable solutions, then sign both!"
Visit the Campaign for Rational Veterinary Medicine here, and sign the petition here.
Sign Danny Chambers' petition on change.org here.
SRD remains a significant problem for the swine industry1. Associated production losses include 30-70% morbidity, a mortality rate of 4-6% (and even higher in severely affected units), decreased feed efficiency and reduced growth rates2.
Zactran contains gamithromycin. Merial says this bactericidal azalide rapidly accumulates in target lung tissue in less than 30 minutes, where it reaches and exceeds the MBC* for SRD pathogens for an extended period, helping to relieve clinical signs and minimise lung damage.
Zactran has a dose rate of 1ml per 25kg in pigs, administered by intramuscular injection.
The product is available in three pack sizes: 50ml glass bottle and 100ml and 250ml polypropylene shock-resistant bottles, and has a 3 year shelf-life.
References
*MBC: Minimum Bactericidal Concentrations. MBC is the lowest concentration of drug which reduces bacterial counts by 99.9% (CVMP/627/01)
For example, a human generic paracetamol/codeine tablet costs approximately 3p at wholesaler prices.
By comparison, an almost identical licensed veterinary equivalent costs ten times as much.
The requirement for veterinary surgeons to prescribe expensive veterinary-licensed medications over cheaper unlicensed medications or drugs licensed for human use was first introduced though EU Directive 2001/82/EC in 2001, which the UK was legally required to implement in the form of the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2013.
The main objectives of the EU directive were to safeguard public health by regulating medicines used in food-producing animals, to ensure the health and welfare of animals by requiring veterinary medicines to be authorised based on quality, safety and efficacy, to facilitate the free movement of medicines between member states and to encourage pharmaceutical innovation.
Whilst there is a strong rationale for the use of licensed medicines in food-producing animals, primarily to protect the public from medicine residues, the case for cats and dogs is weaker.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that legislators considered the increased cost to pet owners of implementing Directive 2001/82/EC, and the potential unintended consequences.
14 years later, this new research shows that the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2013 may in fact harm companion animal welfare and stifle pharmaceutical innovation.
In terms of harm, the survey found that 38.8% of veterinary surgeons noted that owners are unable to afford the veterinary licensed drugs they are obliged to prescribe between 1-4 times per week.
Another 25.8% of vets said this happened very often, ie at least once a week.
Another 24% said it happened at least once a month.
From these figures, the authors calculated that 438,000 owners may be unable to afford vet licensed drugs over cheaper human-use generics.
In requiring vets to prescribe veterinary-licensed medications, there should obviously be a clear, measurable benefit to animal welfare.
For example, if it were possible to argue that the regulation has reduced the occurrence of adverse reactions to medication or inefficacy.
However, in the US, where no comparable regulation is in place and the same drugs are used, there is no evidence of this being the case, despite the very much larger population.
There is also evidence to suggest that the system may stifle, rather than promote the development of novel treatments, as pharmaceutical companies have prioritised the veterinary licensing of human use drugs over the development of new ones, because it costs them far less and carries less risk of failure.
Since the introduction of Directive 2001/82/EC, pharmaceutical companies have launched six novel veterinary medicines for companion animals in the EU, namely Frunevetmab, fluralaner, lokivetmab, bedinvetmab, lotilaner and pradofloxacin.
By contrast, over the same time period, there have been 13 human use drugs licensed for veterinary use, with no evidence to support the idea that they have become safer, better or more effective in animals than they were when the cheaper human-use variants were prescribed before the Directive was introduced.
David Mills MRCVS, lead author of the article, said: "It is incumbent on veterinary legislators and regulators to consider the impact of their legislation and regulation on the cost to the consumer and consequently on animal welfare.
"In this case, they need to consider whether the benefits of licensing are real and measurable, and that they outweigh any harm caused by impact of licensing on the cost of treatments.
"Whilst it is only right that pharmaceutical companies should be rewarded for developing novel treatments, removing the requirement for vets to prescribe licensed medication when a human generic exists, or even simply allowing discretionary use of unlicensed medication on the grounds of cost are all simple solutions that would better serve animal welfare, reduce costs to owners and promote research of new drugs."
PDF
Reference
The paper, ‘Mortality Related to General Anaesthesia and Sedation in Dogs under UK Primary Veterinary Care’, published in Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia1, used data from more than 150,000 dogs attending first opinion veterinary practices around the UK.
The study examined the overall risk of death for each dog which had at least one sedation and/or anaesthesia procedure over a set period of time.
The study also looked at anaesthesia related to neutering (spaying and castration) in dogs because these procedures are so common in the UK and anaesthetic risk can be a significant worry for owners.
The findings showed that currently there are 14 deaths in 10,000 dogs within two weeks of sedation/anaesthesia procedures carried out for any reason, of which 10 deaths per 10,000 are within 48 hours of these procedures.
For neutering surgeries in dogs, the risk is even smaller, with one death in 10,000 neuter procedures related to sedation and/or anaesthesia.
No association was seen between the age of puppies at the time of neutering and risk of death.
Factors associated with increased risk of sedation and anaesthetic-related death in this study included:
Certain breeds, such as Cocker Spaniels, were found to be at lower risk compared with mixed breeds.
The team also investigated whether flat-faced ‘brachycephalic’ breeds were associated with higher risk.
Surprisingly, longer-nosed ‘dolichocephalic’ breeds showed four times the odds of sedative/anaesthetic-related death compared with medium-length nose dogs, whereas no additional risk was seen in flat-faced breeds.
The authors of the paper say that overall, these results should provide some reassurance for the veterinary and dog-owning communities regarding the safety of neutering for young puppies, as well as the relative safety of sedatives and anaesthetics for more complex procedures.
For older dogs, those with poorer health or undergoing planned complex surgeries, the results emphasise the value of careful planning to manage the anaesthetic risks.
Urgent procedures, regardless of complexity, were shown to carry greater risk and therefore should be approached with high vigilance and caution.
Dr Dan O’Neill, Associate Professor in Companion Animal Epidemiology at the RVC and co-author of the paper, said:
“This new VetCompass study can help owners deal with these fears by understanding the real anaesthetic risk is not that high: 14 deaths in every 10,000 dogs. Decision-making based on the known can now replace fear of the unknown.”
Full paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaa.2022.03.006 / https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467298722001015
You probably know that just reading content on www.vetsurgeon.org can count towards the 10 hours of undocumented Continuing Professional Development you are allowed to undertake each year. What you may NOT know is that other activities on the site can now count towards the requirement for 35 hours (on average) of documented CPD, without restriction. Best of all, it's free!
This is largely due to the way in which the VetSurgeon community has taken off over the last six months, meaning that the increasingly lively forums now offer a valid way to share knowledge and learn from each other.
To count towards your CPD requirement, your activities on VetSurgeon must be part of a documented process of appraisal and development. In other words, you must keep a record of your activity and how it has contributed to your professional development.
By default, VetSurgeon.org keeps a record of your activity on the website, which provides an auditable trail. To view your activity, click My Account (main menu) > View My Profile > View all activity. If no activity is displayed, checked that you have activity logging enabled in the 'Display Options' under 'Edit My Profile.
Currently, there are three main VetSurgeon.org activities you can take part in which can count towards your annual CPD requirements:
Participating in forumsIf you post a question on VetSurgeon.org and receive a reply, you may count the time spent posting your question and reading the answer as CPD. You should keep a note of what you learned.If you post a reply to a question, and needed to research your answer, the time you spend researching and posting your answer also counts as CPD. So, if you are a specialist answering a question in your sleep, that doesn't count. But if the question made you think, and you need to check your facts, that does.To count towards your CPD allowance, your forum posts must concern a subject which can reasonably be argued to advance your knowledge and proficiency as a vet (so RCVS-bashing posts won't qualify!)
Publishing content on VetSurgeonVetSurgeon offers a number of additional opportunities to self-publish on the site, and any time spent researching and publishing qualifying content (which can reasonably be argued to advance your knowledge and proficiency as a vet) can count towards your documented CPD. For example, Practical Veterinary Tips (http://www.vetsurgeon.org/blogs/veterinary-tips/default.aspx) is a newsfeed in which members can publish clinical tips; the time you spend researching and publishing a tip would qualify.
Documented readingAdditionally, time spent reading the site where you document specifically what you have read and what you have learned can also count towards your documented CPD.
Further information about CPD requirements is available from the RCVS website: http://www.rcvs.org.uk/cpd
Broadline was a fipronil-based parasiticide which also contained (S)-methoprene, eprinomectin and praziquantel.
NexGard Combo, on the other hand, contains esafoxolaner together with eprinomectin and praziquantel for worming.
Both products are licensed for use in cats with or at risk from mixed infestations by fleas, ticks, mites cestodes, nematodes.
There's an explainer video about NexGard Combo on the Boehringer Academy website: https://www.boehringer-academy.co.uk/
The YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 range contains a new combination of ActivEase Green Lipped Mussel extract and purified fish oil to provide a concentrated, sustainable source of Omega 3 EFA’s and higher levels of essential fatty acids, ETA, EPA and DHA.
Lintbells says that these ingredients, together with other additions to the formula, aid the body's own natural anti-inflammatory process to soothe stiff joints. The company says the new product is clinically proven to work within six weeks.1
Lintbells Product Marketing Executive Gemma Cunningham said: "It’s important that the company keeps innovating. This new launch reflects Lintbells commitment to take quality to the highest level and to invest in research and development to constantly improve the products available to practices."
YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 is available as a palatable tablet for dogs that is accepted like a treat by 86% of dogs.2. The cat product is well accepted by 86% of cats3 and is presented in a capsule that is broken to allow the contents to be sprinkled on food.
Lintbells Veterinary Director, James Howie, says YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 can be recommended with confidence as part of a multimodal approach to joint management: "We want to provide practices with the best and most advanced formulations with proven outcomes.
"YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 is highly bioavailable, benefits from full traceability and purity assessments and is made with real expertise using the highest quality ingredients. It makes sense to make it veterinary exclusive and put it into the hands of professionals who can recommend it to the animals that will benefit most."
YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 Dog and YuMOVE ADVANCE 360 Cat are expected to be available to order from veterinary wholesalers on 5th February 2018. For further information practices should contact their Lintbells Veterinary Business Executive or call 01462 790886.
The College says that until now, veterinary research has largely ignored lipomas because they are rarely referred for specialist treatment.
For the study, the RVC identified 2765 lipoma cases from a population of 384,284 dogs in its VetCompass Programme (which collects anonymised clinical data on dogs under primary veterinary care in the UK) in 2013.
The study found that 1 in 50 dogs are affected by lipomas each year and that Springer Spaniels, Dobermann Pinschers, Weimaraners and Labrador Retrievers are the most susceptible to lipomas (5-8% prevalence).
The study also found:
At least one lipoma was diagnosed in 1.94% of dogs during the single year of the study.
Individual dogs with an adult bodyweight that was equal or higher than their breed/sex average had 1.96 times the odds of lipoma.
As dogs age, their odds of getting lipoma increase. Dogs aged between 9-12 years were over 17 times more likely to be diagnosed with lipoma compared to dogs aged 3-6 years old.
Neutered dogs had higher risk.
Insured dogs had 1.78 times the odds of diagnosis.
Purebred dogs had 1.16 times the odds compared with crossbred dogs.
Dr Lynda Rutherford, Clinician and Lecturer in Small Animal Surgery at the RVC, said: "This paper has supported the theory that lipomas are more common in older, overweight dogs.
"This information is useful as it can be discussed with owners and used as another reason to keep pet dog’s weight under control. It also provides a useful insight into how common lipomas are within the UK dog population."
O'NEILL, D. G., CORAH, C. H., CHURCH, D. B., BRODBELT, D. C. & RUTHERFORD, L. 2018. Lipoma in dogs under primary veterinary care in the UK: prevalence and breed associations. Canine Genetics and Epidemiology, 5, 9. https://cgejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40575-018-0065-9
The first change has been made to paragraph 1.6 which now advises general practitioners to check whether the vet they are referring a case to is on the RCVS Specialist or Advanced Practitioner list, explaining the difference to the client and what sets them apart from other vets who might be prepared to accept a referral.
Also, practitioners who accept a referral should provide information to the referrer about the experience and status of those likely to be responsible for the case.
The guidance about conflicts of interest in paragraph 1.7 has also been amended such that referring surgeons should tell clients if they are referring their case to a practice owned by the same group.
There is new guidance about how vets and nurses talk about referral practitioners, with the new advice being to focus on accepted terms such as 'RCVS Specialist' and 'RCVS Advanced Practitioner', and avoid more general terms like 'referral surgeon' or 'consultant' to avoid confusion or implying that individuals hold more qualifications than they do.
Lastly, there is new guidance that vets may only use the name 'Specialist' in the name of their practice where there is genuine and meaningful involvement, and oversight, in case management by at least one RCVS specialist in all disciplines where any clinical services are offered under the business name.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/setting-standards/advice-and-guidance/code-of-professional-conduct-for-veterinary-surgeons/supporting-guidance/referrals-and-second-opinions/
VetSurgeon.org has seen copies of correspondence from IVC which claims that its Pet Health Club has built up goodwill amongst the group's customers, and that the use of the term by other practices risks confusing the public and taking unfair advantage of the reputation built up by IVC.
One wonders which bright spark at IVC thought this was a good idea.
Threatening legal action against small independent practices is not a great look in a caring profession.
Besides which, where is the evidence that other practices using the term 'Pet Health Club' has any impact on IVC's business whatsoever?
It is also difficult to see how significant consumer confusion would arise in practice, given that pet health plans are typically offered to a practice’s existing clients rather than marketed as standalone consumer brands.
Ironically, given the CMA investigation, IVC's Pet Health Club website is opaque about which practice group (or practice) provides its own service.
How it is therefore possible to argue that it has built up a reputation is also unclear.
Finally, if you Google "Pet Health Club", you'll see that IVC already dominates the search results in a way that makes it vanishingly unlikely that its service is going to be confused with anyone else's.
This would all be laughable, except it's not if you're one of the 20 or 30 practices that VetSurgeon.org hears have been on the receiving end of a threatening letter.
Natalie Morris-Webb MRCVS from Malthouse Veterinary Group, one of the affected practices, said: “I was stunned to receive a letter from IVC claiming that our Pet Health Club, which we launched in 2017, is an infringement under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and that we’re using a registered word mark without the consent of the proprietor.
“It’s a ubiquitous term that lots of practices use and it quickly became apparent that these letters have been sent out far and wide.
"There are practices that have been using the term for well over 10 years and to rebrand will be very expensive and time-consuming for what are mostly small businesses.
“We’ve had some conversation with IVC’s representatives to discuss how else we can resolve the situation and whether such a heavy-handed approach is really necessary, because surely IVC don’t want a legal spat with so many independent businesses.
“It’s also very worrying to receive aggressive legal threats from a huge organisation, so it was reassuring to hear from other practices that are facing the same dilemma, and we want to extend our support to others in the same position.
"We’ve therefore launched We Are Spartacus where any practices that are affected can register their details.
"We can then work together and decide how to move forward as a collective."
Hopefully, there will be no need.
Hopefully, someone higher up the chain at IVC will stop this madness, admit that it called this one wrong and immediately write to the businesses it has already contacted, apologise profusely and withdraw its threat.
But if the company persists and wins it'll probably be a pyrrhic victory.
After all, pet health plans have largely been sold on the back of routine flea, worm and tick control, the need for which is starting to be questioned by the profession, particularly in the light of research pointing to the possible harm to other species, but also because of the greater focus on the cost of veterinary care.
Pfizer Animal Health has launched Dexdomitor, a new, advanced form of the popular sedative /analgesic Domitor (medetomidine).
According to Pfizer, Dexdomitor contains only the right-handed enantiomer (dexmeditomidine) which is responsible for the beneficial pharmacological effects of the meditomidine molecule. By removing the left-handed enantiomer (levomedetomidine) from the original racemic mixture the same sedative and analgesic effects can be achieved with a lower metabolic load, less potential for interaction with other drugs and half the active substance.
According to Dr Jo Murrell, Senior lecturer in veterinary anaesthesia in Bristol Vet School, the use of dexmedetomidine has a number of advantages in terms of veterinary use:
"Because dexmedetomidine had to undergo a lot of safety studies to get market authorisation in humans, we have a huge amount of cardiovascular data about the effects of dexmedetomidine in dogs,” she said. “That means we know very precisely the effects of dexmedetomidine on cardiac output, on organ blood flow and the changes in blood flow to vital organs such as the heart and brain."
Dr Murrell recommends that vets who are currently using Domitor should consider switching to Dexdomitor when it becomes available.
"You won’t notice any disadvantages as a result of the switch, but you may well notice that the effects of dexmedetomidine are more reliable compared to medetomidine, and you may notice some benefits in terms of recovery from anaesthetic combinations."
Dechra Veterinary Products has announced the reintroduction of Gelofusine®, a collodial plasma volume substitute used in the management of hypovolaemic shock in cats, dogs and horses. The company says that Gelofusine has the added advantage of containing no calcium and is therefore compatible with blood and blood products. Gelofusine is isooncotic (same colloid oncotic pressure) with plasma and therefore volume replacement is equivalent to the volume infused. Thus there is no danger of volume overload, as exists when using a plasma expander. Each bottle comes with a Free Dual Giving Set (worth £3.35), featuring a dual sectional dial with a 10%-40% scale for colloids.
According to the company, Prinocate contains the same combination of Moxidectin and Imidacloprid as Advocate. In dogs it is licensed for the treatment and prevention of Angiostrongylus vasorum (lungworm); for the treatment and prevention of fleas and also for lice, mites, heartworm and roundworms. In cats, the licence covers fleas, mites, roundworm and heart worm.
Prinocate is offered in six presentations to suit all weight ranges and in packs of three pipettes, to suit most pet health plans. Each pipette is individually wrapped for ease of use and dispensing.
Krka’s National Veterinary Sales Manager Will Ridgway, said: "Prinocate offers practices and pet owners the reassurance of tried and trusted actives moxidectin and imidacloprid, the reliability of spot-on delivery and the affordability that Krka customers have come to expect.
"Its launch, hot on the heels of Selehold, and added to our wormers Milprazon and Anthelmin, means that Krka now offers an attractive, reliable and affordable parasite control range and, during its launch period, we are offering one free pack of Prinocate for every five purchased.”
He added: “As Angiostrongylus vasorum is one of the main parasites of concern in practice today, to mark the launch of Prinocate, we’re delighted to be offering a free webinar with Ian Wright during which he will explore how A.vasorum has managed to spread so successfully and the most effective preventative protocol to offer your clients.”
The webinar takes place on Tuesday, 2nd June 2020 at 8:00pm. To register, visit: https://tinyurl.com/avasorum
Canergy contains propentofylline, a xanthine derivative which, Virbac says, potentiates the action of adenosine, a molecule found in the body which has a wide range of physiological effects which can be beneficial in the management of various age-related degenerative disease in dogs and cats1.
In particular, Virbac says propentofylline improves peripheral and cerebral vascular blood circulation, and has bronchodilating actions. This helps to increase oxygen supply to organs and muscles, which can result in a positive effect on overall demeanour and energy levels in older dogs.
Canergy is a beef-flavoured tablet which features SmartTab divisible design.
Canergy Product Manager Claire Lewis said: "Growing old should not have to be a barrier to enjoying life, so we are delighted to be able to add Canergy to the Virbac portfolio."
For more information, contact Virbac ob 01359 243243, email: enquiries@virbac.co.uk or visit: www.virbac.co.uk
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has struck off the Register a veterinary surgeon who delayed attending a dog that had been run over at a farm, causing her to suffer unnecessarily.
Following a two-day hearing, the Disciplinary Committee found Munhuwepasi Chikosi guilty of unreasonably delaying attending Mitzi, a fourteen-and-a-half-year-old Labrador cross, and of unnecessarily causing her to remain in pain and suffering for at least an hour.
On 9 September 2011, Mr Chikosi had been working as a locum veterinary surgeon at the Vets Now out-of-hours emergency service in Barton-le-Clay, Bedford, when Mitzi's owner telephoned him to say that his dog was severely injured and to request a home visit for the purpose of euthanasia.
At Mr Chikosi's request, the owner attempted to bring Mitzi into the practice using a blanket. However, it was not possible to get Mitzi into a Land Rover, and she uncharacteristically bit the owner's son, so her owner called the practice again.
Mr Chikosi repeated the request to bring the dog in, saying that he was unable to leave the practice because he was looking after other animals, but that he could possibly organise another veterinary surgeon to visit "probably within the next hour or two".
The Committee considered Mr Chikosi's actions in context of the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct 2011, which listed a number of factors for veterinary surgeons to consider when deciding whether to attend an animal away from the practice premises.
These included the likely treatment needed, the possibility of the animal being safely conveyed to the veterinary surgery, the health status of the animal and ability of the owner to manage the animal's pain until veterinary attention could be sought during normal hours, and travelling time for the veterinary surgeon.
However, the Committee found Mr Chikosi had made no enquiries to determine whether Mitzi was in a fit condition to be moved, and offered no advice as to how her condition could be alleviated whilst waiting for the home visit. Further, his advice that Mitzi should be moved on a blanket was wrong, as she may have had an injured back.
The Committee concluded that, from the outset, Mr Chikosi took the stance that he was unable to leave the practice because he was the only veterinary surgeon present.
However, the Committee noted, from the information available, that there were only three in-patients, no critical cases and a qualified veterinary nurse was present. The Committee found there was no good reason why he should not have attended the farm, which was only 10 to 15 minutes' drive away.
The Committee said that, by the time Mitzi's owner called a second time, it was clear that the out-of-hours service was experiencing difficulty finding a second veterinary surgeon but, instead of going to the farm himself, Mr Chikosi waited another hour until the second veterinary surgeon arrived at the out-of-hours service.
Professor Peter Lees, chairing and speaking on behalf of the Committee said: "The Committee is satisfied that the delay caused Mitzi unnecessary suffering, which was evidenced by her uncharacteristically biting [her owner's] son. [Her owner] had recognised the severity of the injuries and the need for euthanasia as soon as was practicable. [Mr Chikosi's] failure to attend a seriously injured dog promptly in the circumstances described falls far short of the conduct to be expected of a reasonably competent veterinary surgeon."
He directed that Mr Chikosi's name be struck off the Register.
A German Shepherd bitch is making an impressive recovery from serious burns, after treatment with manuka honey impregnated dressings.
'Lady' sustained her injuries after being trapped in a blazing house in Cornwall, as reported by the BBC. She has since been under the care of Amanda Manley at the Cornwall Animal Hospital, who has been using Activon Tulle Manuka honey impregnated dressings to treat the wounds.
Amanda said: "I'd like to say it was all down to the manuka honey, although it's difficult to make a scientific judgement without a control in place. Nevertheless I am very impressed with the results and will definitely use honey again in a similar situation"
Rachel Fuller, Product Manager for Activon (medical grade manuka honey dressings) at Dechra Veterinary Products said: "In human medicine, manuka honey has become popular as a result of its antibacterial and healing properties. All honey has a degree of effectiveness, but the unique properties of manuka honey make it by far the most effective for use on wounds. It is now gaining recognition among veterinary professionals, which has led to the introduction of honey-based wound management systems for animal care".
According to Dechra, Manuka honey has been shown to be effective against over 70 strains of bacteria commonly found in wounds, including MRSA1. It also has an osmotic effect which draws fluid from a wound bed and helps to remove slough and debride necrotic tissue that can harbour bacteria and impede wound healing2. It protects the wound bed and provides a moist wound healing environment3 and the water soluble antioxidants provide favourable conditions that help to promote granulation and epithelialisation, thus faster healing. There is a rapid reduction in odour when honey is applied to a malodorous wound and it also acts as an anti-inflammatory, which therefore reduces pain.
The Cornwall Animal Hospital is a registered charity which exists to provide affordable pet care to those on a low income. It has provided all Lady's treatment at cost, including the Activon dressings, which have since been replaced by Dechra as a gesture of support.
Photographs of the case at initial examination, post debridement / pre-treatment and post treatment are in the galleries.
Davies says pulmonic stenosis is one of the most common congenital heart defects in dogs. In most cases it is caused by a malformation of the pulmonic valve with fusion of the leaflets (type A stenosis) or with the presence of rudimentary valves accompanied by hypoplasia of the annulus (type B stenosis).
Dogs with severe stenosis are at risk of sudden death, heart failure and have a decreased survival time in comparison to normal dogs.
Minimally invasive catheter based procedures (balloon valvuloplasty) have become the treatment of choice for valvular pulmonic stenosis, with good results in most but not all cases. French Bulldogs are predisposed to the condition and tend to not respond to valvuloplasty as well as other dogs.1
In this case, the dog was first referred to Pedro Oliveira, RCVS and European Veterinary Specialist in Small Animal Cardiology at Davies, for treatment of severe pulmonic stenosis.
An echocardiogram confirmed the presence of a type B stenosis accompanied by marked right ventricular hypertrophy and also an atrial septal defect.
A standard balloon valvuloplasty procedure was performed without complications and the dog initially showed improvement (click image right to enlarge). Soon after, however, she began to suffer episodes of weakness and collapse and was readmitted.
An echocardiogram showed that the right ventricular obstruction had worsened.
Pedro said: "Re-stenosis has been reported in up to 16% of cases following balloon valvuloplasty and in this case it was suspected to be due to the formation of scar tissue in the valve leaflets. The pressures inside the right side of the heart were now higher than left allowing blood to flow through the atrial septal defect from the right to the left atrium directly without receiving oxygen from the lungs.
"Whenever Gracie got excited or tried to exercise she would go 'blue' from lack of oxygen and collapse. In fact her quality of life was so poor that euthanasia was suggested at that point. For this reason we decided we should attempt this novel procedure. The only other option would have been open-chest surgery (patch graft) but this held a higher risk of complications during the anaesthesia and even death. Also, the cost of surgery would have been higher than this new option."
Pedro performed the procedure with fellow Davies cardiologist, Jose Matos, while Antonia Mavropoulou guided them using transoesophageal echocardiography.
Under a general anaesthetic the heart structure was assessed using transoesophageal echocardiography and angiography to choose the correct size of the stent for Gracie.
An 8mm wide and 4cm long stainless steel catheter tightly mounted on a balloon was chosen.
This was then positioned across the pulmonic valve and the balloon was expanded forcing the stent to open up to its full size (figure 2B). There was an immediate and significant improvement of blood flow through the stent (figure 2C), the patient recovered well and she was discharged four days later.
Re-examination after three months showed improved flow across the stent and a reversal of the right to left shunting across the atrial septal defect. Gracie stopped experiencing episodes of collapse or cyanosis and is now able to exercise and lead a more normal life.
Pedro said: "This technique has been used in very few cases in the whole world and to the best of our knowledge this is the first time it has been used in the UK.
"It is more technically challenging and costly than a standard ballooning although it may provide an effective, safe, and cheaper alternative to patch graft surgery. In this particular case we feel it made an important difference in terms of quality of life and prognosis for Gracie.
The practice's dentistry and oral surgery team, led by Peter Southerden, has now carried out its first two successful reconstructions using the technique, following oral tumour resection.
Use of patient-specific implants (PSI) for jaw reconstruction is a new technique, which provides an alternative to bone regenerative techniques. Both techniques can be used in cases which have had significant jaw resection or need reconstructive surgery after a trauma.
Peter said: "To my knowledge, using this technique to create patient-specific implants for rostral mandibular reconstruction following bilateral rostral mandibulectomy has not been reported in dogs before.
"The reconstructive surgery involves taking pre and post-operative CT scans of the affected area and sending them to a specialist human medical PSI design company, which then uses 3D titanium printing technology to recreate the missing bone.
"In our first two cases, both dogs are doing really well. The feedback we’ve received from owners suggests their dogs have gained significant benefit from the jaw reconstruction process."
Peter is one of three dentistry and oral surgery clinicians at Eastcott alongside Andrew Perry and resident Ingrid Tundo, with a second resident due to join in 2019.
The team caters for dentistry cases including periodontology, endodontics, orthodontics and restorative dentistry, to complex cases including oral tumours, traumatic injuries and congenital issues such as cleft palates.
Peter added: "There aren’t many people with specialist qualifications in this field, possibly only six in the UK and we are the only team working with the backup of a multi-disciplinary referral hospital.
"Having a team of three, soon to be four, is unusual and means we have a big caseload and see a wide range of different cases. We are very keen on developing new techniques such the ones we have already introduced."
For more information about Eastcott Referrals, visit www.eastcottreferrals.co.uk.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has struck off Suffolk vet Oliver Fraser Lown after finding him guilty of five separate charges relating to the possession of extreme animal pornography and sexual activity with animals.
Mr Lown, who graduated from Szent Istvan University in Hungary and has stated that he has never practised in the UK, did not attend the Disciplinary Committee hearing but was represented by Mr Jo Cooper, a solicitor-advocate. He was accused of five charges of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect:
On the first day of the hearing, the respondent made an application to the Disciplinary Committee that the hearing should be held in private on the basis that any publicity about the case 'would offend public morality' due to the nature of the allegations and because the respondent's father suffers from ill-health, which could be adversely affected by any publicity. The Committee rejected the application on the grounds that the nature of the allegations was already in the public domain and that public justice in the context of professional regulation outweighed the private concerns of the respondent regarding his father.
On the second day of the hearing, the respondent made an application to adjourn charges 2 - 5 on the basis that he had already admitted, and received a conditional discharge, for the first charge and would, therefore, not oppose removal from the Register and an undertaking never to re-apply. The respondent also argued that the original decision of the College to register him in July 2013 was flawed because it was unfair to admit him, in awareness of his conditional discharge, apparently for the purpose of taking disciplinary proceedings against him. He also referred to the Crown Prosecution Service's decision not to prosecute him in respect of charge 4.
This application was dismissed by the Disciplinary Committee on the grounds of the gravity of charges 2 - 5 and the fact that the respondent chose to apply to join the Register and had been advised to seek legal advice regarding his conditional discharge beforehand. Furthermore, the Disciplinary Committee heard that there was no error at the time of his registration because the conditional discharge was not a conviction and therefore, under the Veterinary Surgeons Act, there was no option to refuse registration.
The respondent then made a final application to have the case adjourned on the grounds that new documentation he had received the previous day regarding his registration had led his lawyers to conclude that the decision to register him may have been unlawful. However, the Disciplinary Committee said that, in its understanding, the RCVS Registrar had no option but to register Mr Lown. The Disciplinary Committee then dismissed the application on the grounds that any challenge of the validity of registration could and should have been made within the three month time limit for judicial review and that no significant new documentation about Mr Lown's registration had come to light that could reasonably be said to have triggered a judicial review and warrant an adjournment. It also again highlighted the gravity of the charges.
The Disciplinary Committee then heard evidence in relation to charges 2 -5, including that of two officers from North Yorkshire Police who took part in the original investigation, who the Committee found to be credible and reliable witnesses, and, after reviewing the evidence, found that all four charges were proven.
The Committee then considered the appropriate sanction for Mr Lown, and took into account a number of aggravating factors including the risk of injury to animals, premeditated misconduct, sexual misconduct, misconduct sustained or repeated over a period of time and his lack of insight into the offences or his overall conduct.
Professor Noreen Burrows, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In these circumstances, the Committee has no doubt that the respondent's conduct was of the utmost seriousness. The material found in possession of the respondent and his own conduct in charge 4 involved the abuse of animals and a total lack of respect for their welfare. In the judgement of the Committee each of the charges individually amounts to disgraceful conduct and the charges certainly amount to disgraceful conduct when taken cumulatively."
In order to safeguard animal welfare, maintain public confidence in the profession and uphold proper standards of conduct, the Disciplinary Committee directed the Registrar to remove Mr Lown's name from the Register.
The Committee's full findings and decision are available on the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).
More on this story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-28524348
The association has released figures from its Voice of the Veterinary Profession survey in which 86% of 671 veterinary surgeons polled in May/June last year had treated conformation-related health problems in brachycephalic cats, such as Persians and Exotic Shorthairs.
The most common conformation-related treatments carried out by these vets were for:
Eye problems (69%)
Breathing/respiratory problems (60%)
Dental issues (45%) and
Skin problems (32%).
The survey also found that on average, 28% of the flat-faced cats vets see in their practices have had or would benefit from having treatment for conformation-related health or welfare problems.
Respondents also said that only a quarter of brachycephalic cat owners were already aware of the potential health issues and just one in twenty were aware of the additional costs associated with the breeds before choosing their pet.
BVA Senior Vice President Gudrun Ravetz said: "Everyone knows that the internet loves cat photos and videos. But as time passes we’ve noticed a growing appetite for novelty creeping in - with quirky and unusual cat breeds proving increasingly popular on social media.
"Currently the UK population of pure breed cats is very small as most cat owners opt for regular non-pedigree ‘moggies’. However, we are worried that the popularity on the internet of breeds with extreme conformation, such as the very flat-faced Persians and Exotic Shorthairs, or gene abnormalities such as cause the ears to bend forward in the Scottish Fold breed, may prompt increased demand among consumers who are unaware of the potential serious health and welfare issues associated with such breeding.
"These figures show that many, many owners are choosing pets without understanding either the possible welfare implications of their extreme features or the potential cost of treating them."
The BVA, which has been campaigning to curb the growing popularity of brachycephalic breeds of dog for some time, says it is keen to emphasise that health and welfare issues relating to extreme conformation are not limited to dogs or to brachycephaly. To that end, it will be launching a wider position statement on extreme conformation in animals later this summer.
For BVA #BreedtoBreathe campaign materials, including infographics and videos which draw attention to the serious health issues experienced by brachycephalic animals, visit: www.bva.co.uk/brachys.
Photo: Shutterstock/Piyato
Ophtocycline is licensed for the treatment of keratitis, conjunctivitis and blepharitis caused by Staphylococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., Proteus spp., and/or Pseudomonas spp.
Dechra says chlortetracycline hydrochloride works against both aerobic and anaerobic Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria.
The recommended dosage is four times a day for five days. The 10 mg/g ophthalmic ointment has a 14-day broached shelf life. There is a one-day withdrawal period for meat and offal.
Dechra Brand Manager Carol Morgan said: "Ophtocycline provides veterinary professionals with a targeted treatment to effectively tackle the growing and reproducing bacteria that causes these eye conditions.
"Chlortetracycline is a bacteriostatic antibiotic which interferes with bacterial protein synthesis in the rapidly growing and reproducing bacterial cell and has both time-dependent and concentration dependent effects.
"We are very pleased to be able to roll out this product to the UK market as part of our ophthalmic range alongside popular products such as Isathal."
For more information visit: www.dechra.co.uk
VetSurgeon.org visited a random selection of stands in the commercial exhibition at BSAVA Congress, and asked: "What's new and exciting?"
Here's what they said: