Influence of Comprehensive Pre-Anaesthetic Assessment on ASA Classification and Surgical Cancellations in Dogs and Cats: A Retrospective Observational Study

Other authors

Institut Català de la Salut

[Cañón Pérez A] Unitat de Cirurgia Experimental, Vall d’Hebron Institut de Recerca (VHIR), Barcelona, Spain. [Marti-Scharfhausen Sánchez MLR] Anicura Indautxu Hospital, Bilbao, Spain. [Sevilla Ureba A] Urvet Palmones Veterinary Emergency Hospital, Cádiz, Spain. [Hernández Magaña EZ] Departamento de Medicina y Cirugía Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Cardenal Herrera-CEU, CEU Universities, Valencia, Spain. [Viscasillas Monteagudo J] Anicura Valencia Sur Veterinary Hospital, Silla Valencia, Spain. [Martínez Albiñana A] Anicura Aitana Hospital, Valencia, Spain

Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus

Publication date

2025-10-14T08:49:56Z

2025-10-14T08:49:56Z

2025-07



Abstract

Animal safety; Pre-anaesthetic assessment; Veterinary anaesthesia


Seguridad animal; Evaluación preanestésica; Anestesia veterinaria


Seguretat animal; Avaluació preanestèsica; Anestèsia veterinària


Anaesthesia carries an inherent risk of morbidity and mortality in veterinary patients, yet the clinical impact of comprehensive pre-anaesthetic assessment (PAA) is insufficiently quantified. We retrospectively reviewed 350 PAAs including 267 dogs and 83 cats, performed at a small-animal teaching hospital in 2021. Signalment, history, physical examination findings, complementary diagnostics, initial ASA physical status (ASA-i), final ASA status after test review (ASA-f) and procedural outcomes were recorded. Complementary diagnostics—predominantly haematology, serum biochemistry, thoracic radiography, and electrocardiography—were requested in 82–86% of cases. ASA-f differed from ASA-i in 7.5% (11/306) of animals: +1 in 3.6%, +2 in 1.0%, −1 in 2.9%; no patient shifted by more than two classes. Fifty-seven planned procedures (16.2%) were cancelled following PAAs, chiefly abdominal (43.9%) and minor soft-tissue surgeries (31.6%). Internal-medicine abnormalities (47%) and cardiac findings (19%) were the leading causes; in 46% of cancellations, the trigger was an abnormal test result absent from the physical examination. Sixty-three percent of cancelled interventions were later completed after further evaluation or treatment. These data demonstrate that structured PAA substantially alters perioperative decision-making in small-animal practice and supports selective yet rigorous diagnostic test use to enhance patient safety and optimise theatre utilisation.

Document Type

Article


Published version

Language

English

Publisher

MDPI

Related items

Veterinary Sciences;12(7)

https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12070612

Recommended citation

This citation was generated automatically.

Rights

Attribution 4.0 International

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This item appears in the following Collection(s)