Clinical outcomes of the use of unidirectional barbed sutures in gastrointestinal surgery for dogs and cats: A retrospective study.
Journal
Veterinary surgery : VS
ISSN: 1532-950X
Titre abrégé: Vet Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8113214
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
revised:
26
04
2023
received:
22
11
2022
accepted:
29
05
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
19
6
2023
entrez:
19
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To report the clinical outcomes of gastrointestinal surgery using unidirectional barbed sutures in single-layer appositional closure in dogs and cats. Retrospective and descriptive study. Twenty-six client-owned dogs; three client-owned cats. Medical records of dogs and cats that received gastrointestinal surgery closed with unidirectional barbed sutures were reviewed to collect information on signalment, physical examinations, diagnostics, surgical procedures, and complications. Short- and long-term follow-up information was collected from the medical records, the owners, or the referring veterinarians. Six gastrotomies, 21 enterotomies, and nine enterectomies were closed with a simple continuous pattern with unidirectional barbed glycomer 631 sutures. Nine dogs had multiple surgical sites closed with unidirectional barbed sutures. None of the cases in the study developed leakage, dehiscence, or septic peritonitis during the 14-day short-term follow up. Long-term follow up information was collected for 19 patients. The median long-term follow-up time was 1076 days (range: 20-2179 days). Two dogs had intestinal obstruction due to strictures at the surgical site 20 and 27 days after surgery. Both were resolved with an enterectomy of the original surgical site. Unidirectional barbed suture was not associated with a risk of leakage or dehiscence after gastrointestinal surgery in dogs and cats. However, strictures may develop in the long term. Unidirectional barbed sutures can be used during gastrointestinal surgery in client-owned dogs and cats. Further investigation of the role of unidirectional barbed sutures leading to abscess, fibrosis, or stricture is necessary.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1009-1014Informations de copyright
© 2023 American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Références
Ellison GW, Case JB, Regier PJ. Intestinal surgery in small animals: historical foundations, current thinking, and future horizons. Vet Surg. 2019;48(7):1171-1180. doi:10.1111/vsu.13275
Monnet E, Smeak DD. Gastrointestinal Surgical Techniques in Small Animals. 1st ed. Wiley Blackwell; 2020.
Grimes JA, Schmiedt CW, Cornell KK, Radlinksy MA. Identification of risk factors for septic peritonitis and failure to survive following gastrointestinal surgery in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2011;238(4):486-494. doi:10.2460/javma.238.4.486
Chadi SA, Fingerhut A, Berho M, et al. Emerging trends in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of gastrointestinal anastomotic leakage. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(12):2035-2051. doi:10.1007/s11605-016-3255-3
Lopez DJ, Holm SA, Korten B, Baum JI, Flanders JA, Sumner JP. Comparison of patient outcomes following enterotomy versus intestinal resection and anastomosis for treatment of intestinal foreign bodies in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021;258(12):1378-1385. doi:10.2460/javma.258.12.1378
Mullen KM, Regier PJ, Fox-Alvarez WA, Case JB, Ellison GW, Colee J. Evaluation of intraoperative leak testing of small intestinal anastomoses performed by hand-sewn and stapled techniques in dogs: 131 cases (2008-2019). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021;258(9):991-998. doi:10.2460/javma.258.9.991
Ralphs SC, Jessen CR, Lipowitz AJ. Risk factors for leakage following intestinal anastomosis in dogs and cats: 115 cases (1991-2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2003;223(1):73-77. doi:10.2460/javma.2003.223.73
Lanz OI, Ellison GW, Bellah J, Weichman G, VanGilder J. Surgical treatment of septic peritonitis without abdominal drainage in 28 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2001;37(1):87-92. doi:10.5326/15473317-37-1-87
Duffy DJ, Moore GE. Influence of oversewing the transverse staple line during functional end-to-end stapled intestinal anastomoses in dogs. Vet Surg. 2020;49(6):1221-1229. doi:10.1111/vsu.13451
Sumner SM, Regier PJ, Case JB, Ellison GW. Evaluation of suture reinforcement for stapled intestinal anastomoses: 77 dogs (2008-2018). Vet Surg. 2019;48(7):1188-1193. doi:10.1111/vsu.13274
DePompeo CM, Bond L, George YE, et al. Intra-abdominal complications following intestinal anastomoses by suture and staple techniques in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018;253(4):437-443. doi:10.2460/javma.253.4.437
Snowdon KA, Smeak DD, Chiang S. Risk factors for dehiscence of stapled functional end-to-end intestinal anastomoses in dogs: 53 cases (2001-2012). Vet Surg. 2015;45(1):91-99. doi:10.1111/vsu.12413
White RN. Modified functional end-to-end stapled intestinal anastomosis: technique and clinical results in 15 dogs. J Small Anim Pract. 2008;49(6):274-281. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5827.2007.00499.x
Jardel N, Hidalgo A, Leperlier D, et al. One stage functional end-to-end stapled intestinal anastomosis and resection performed by nonexpert surgeons for the treatment of small intestinal obstruction in 30 dogs. Vet Surg. 2011;40(2):216-222. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.2010.00784.x
Kaul S, Sammon J, Bhandari A, Peabody J, Rogers CG, Menon M. A novel method of urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using a unidirectional barbed wound closure device: feasibility study and early outcomes in 51 patients. J Endourol. 2010;24(11):1789-1793. doi:10.1089/end.2010.0200
Li H, Liu C, Zhang H, et al. The use of unidirectional barbed suture for urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131167. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0131167
Lin Y-F, S-ke L, Liu Q-Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of barbed suture in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2017;33(3):107-115. doi:10.1016/j.kjms.2016.12.005
Williams SB, Alemozaffar M, Lei Y, et al. Randomized controlled trial of barbed polyglyconate versus polyglactin suture for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy anastomosis: technique and outcomes. Eur Urol. 2010;58(6):875-881. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.07.021
Weld KJ, Ames CD, Hruby G, Humphrey PA, Landman J. Evaluation of a novel knotless self-anchoring suture material for urinary tract reconstruction. Urology. 2006;67(6):1133-1137. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2005.12.022
Spah CE, Elkins AD, Wehrenberg A, et al. Evaluation of two novel self-anchoring barbed sutures in a prophylactic laparoscopic gastropexy compared with intracorporeal tied knots. Vet Surg. 2013;42(8):932-942. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.2013.12043.x
Arbaugh M, Case JB, Monnet E. Biomechanical comparison of glycomer 631 and glycomer 631 knotless for use in canine incisional gastropexy. Vet Surg. 2012;42(2):205-209. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.2012.01051.x
Imhoff DJ, Cohen A, Monnet E. Biomechanical analysis of laparoscopic incisional gastropexy with intracorporeal suturing using knotless polyglyconate. Vet Surg. 2014;44(S1):39-43. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.2014.12177.x
Coleman KA, Adams S, Smeak DD, Monnet E. Laparoscopic gastropexy using knotless unidirectional suture and an articulated endoscopic suturing device: seven cases. Vet Surg. 2016;45(S1):O101. doi:10.1111/vsu.12570
Coleman KA, Monnet E. Comparison of laparoscopic gastropexy performed via intracorporeal suturing with knotless unidirectional barbed suture using a needle driver versus a roticulated endoscopic suturing device: 30 cases. Vet Surg. 2017;46(7):1002-1007. doi:10.1111/vsu.12722
Bautista T, Shabbir A, Rao J, So J, Kono K, Durai P. Enterotomy closure using knotless and barbed suture in laparoscopic upper gastrointestinal surgeries. Surg Endosc. 2015;30(4):1699-1703. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4395-3
Hansen LA, Monnet EL. Evaluation of a novel suture material for closure of intestinal anastomoses in canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res. 2012;73(11):1819-1823. doi:10.2460/ajvr.73.11.1819
Ehrhart NP, Kaminskaya K, Miller JA, Zaruby JF. in vivo assessment of absorbable knotless barbed suture for single layer gastrotomy and enterotomy closure. Vet Surg. 2013;42(2):210-216. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.2013.01090.x
Demyttenaere SV, Nau P, Henn M, et al. Barbed suture for gastrointestinal closure: a randomized control trial. Surg Innov. 2009;16(3):237-242. doi:10.1177/1553350609342988
Lin Y, Lai S, Huang J, Du L. The efficacy and safety of knotless barbed sutures in the surgical field: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):23425. doi:10.1038/srep23425
Miller J, Zaruby J, Kaminskaya K. Evaluation of a barbed suture device versus conventional suture in a canine enterotomy model. J Invest Surg. 2012;25(2):107-111. doi:10.3109/08941939.2011.603818
Giusto G, Iussich S, Tursi M, Perona G, Gandini M. Comparison of two different barbed suture materials for end-to-end jejuno-jejunal anastomosis in pigs. Acta Vet Scand. 2019;61(1):3. doi:10.1186/s13028-018-0437-x
Strelchik A, Coleman MC, Scharf VF, Stoneburner RM, Thieman Mankin KM. Intestinal incisional dehiscence rate following enterotomy for foreign body removal in 247 dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2019;255(6):695-699. doi:10.2460/javma.255.6.695
Duell JR, Thieman Mankin KM, Rochat MC, et al. Frequency of dehiscence in hand-sutured and stapled intestinal anastomoses in dogs. Vet Surg. 2016;45(1):100-103. doi:10.1111/vsu.12428
Hiebert EC, Barry SL, Sawyere DM, DeMonaco SM, Muro NM. Intestinal dehiscence and mortality in cats undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. J Feline Med Surg. 2021;24(8):779-786. doi:10.1177/1098612x211048454
Davis DJ, Demianiuk RM, Musser J, Podsiedlik M, Hauptman J. Influence of preoperative septic peritonitis and anastomotic technique on the dehiscence of enterectomy sites in dogs: a retrospective review of 210 anastomoses. Vet Surg. 2017;47(1):125-129. doi:10.1111/vsu.12704
Shales CJ, Warren J, Anderson DM, Baines SJ, White RA. Complications following full-thickness small intestinal biopsy in 66 dogs: a retrospective study. J Small Anim Prac. 2005;46(7):317-321. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5827.2005.tb00326.x
Jönsson K, Jiborn H, Zederfeldt B. Mechanical and biochemical alterations in the intestinal wall adjacent to an anastomosis. Am J Surg. 1986;151(3):387-390. doi:10.1016/0002-9610(86)90474-5
Fealey MJ, Regier PJ, Steadman BSC, Brad Case J, Garcia-Pereira F. Initial leak pressures of four anastomosis techniques in cooled cadaveric canine jejunum. Vet Surg. 2020;49(3):480-486. doi:10.1111/vsu.13392
Ullman SL, Pavletic MM, Clark GN. Open intestinal anastomosis with surgical stapling equipment in 24 dogs and cats. Vet Surg. 1991;20(6):385-391. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.1991.tb00344.x
Clapp B, Klingsporn W, Lodeiro C, et al. Small bowel obstructions following the use of barbed suture: a review of the literature and analysis of the maude database. Surg Endosc. 2019;34(3):1261-1269. doi:10.1007/s00464-019-06890-z