Livia Perles, Camila Goloni, Brana Sanctos Alo Bonder, Fabio Alves Teixeira, Stephanie de Souza Theodoro, Aulus Cavalieri Carciofi, Karin Werther
Nasoesophageal feeding and PPN were technically feasible in these two hospitalised giant anteaters. These cases provide preliminary clinical information on alternative nutritional support in this species but do not establish the safety or efficacy of either technique.
BACKGROUND: Information regarding enteral and parenteral nutritional support in hospitalised giant anteaters (Myrmecophaga tridactyla) is limited.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the nutritional management and clinical outcomes of two giant anteaters receiving different forms of nutritional support following traumatic brain injury.
METHODS: Clinical records of two free-ranging giant anteaters admitted after traumatic accidents were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical presentation, nutritional interventions, administration procedures, complications and outcomes were evaluated. One animal received enteral nutrition through a nasoesophageal tube, whereas the other received partial parenteral nutrition (PPN).
RESULTS: The first anteater presented with a skull fracture and cerebral haemorrhage and was unable to feed voluntarily. Nasoesophageal feeding was provided for 7 days and was not associated with observed aspiration or nasal complications. Voluntary feeding subsequently resumed, and the animal was discharged after 2 months. The second anteater presented comatose following head trauma and received PPN after 4 days without voluntary food intake. Hyperglycemia occurred during administration and was managed by reducing the infusion rate. Voluntary food intake resumed on the second day of PPN. However, the animal died 15 days after admission from complications attributed to the head trauma.
CONCLUSIONS: Nasoesophageal feeding and PPN were technically feasible in these two hospitalised giant anteaters. These cases provide preliminary clinical information on alternative nutritional support in this species but do not establish the safety or efficacy of either technique.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This retrospective descriptive case series did not involve a prospective clinical trial requiring registration.