Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Leak testing during small intestine surgery in dogs and outcomes
By Mullen, Kaitlyn M et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2021·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Evaluation of intraoperative leak testing of small intestinal anastomoses performed by hand-sewn and stapled techniques in dogs: 131 cases (2008-2019).
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 131 dogs that had surgery to reconnect their intestines were studied to see if a special leak test during surgery could prevent problems afterward. Some dogs had their intestines sewn together by hand, while others had them stapled. After surgery, 9% of the dogs experienced a serious complication where the connection failed, leading to infections. The study found that the leak test did not significantly lower the risk of these complications, regardless of whether the intestines were sewn or stapled.
People also search for: dog intestinal surgery complications · dog surgery leak test · dog postoperative care after intestinal surgery
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of postoperative dehiscence on the basis of intraoperative anastomotic leak test results (ie, positive or negative for leakage or testing not performed) between dogs that underwent hand-sewn anastomosis (HSA) or functional end-to-end stapled anastomosis (FEESA) of the small intestine. ANIMALS: 131 client-owned dogs that underwent 144 small intestinal anastomoses (94 FEESA and 50 HSA). PROCEDURES: Medical records were searched to identify dogs that had undergone a small intestinal anastomosis (HSA or FEESA) from January 2008 through October 2019. Data were collected regarding signalment, indication for surgery, location of the anastomosis, surgical technique, the presence of preoperative septic peritonitis, performance of intraoperative leak testing, development of postoperative dehiscence, and duration of follow-up. RESULTS: Intraoperative leak testing was performed during 62 of 144 (43.1%) small intestinal anastomoses, which included 26 of 94 (27.7%) FEESAs and 36 of 50 (72.0%) HSAs. Thirteen of 144 (9.0%) anastomoses underwent dehiscence after surgery (median, 4 days; range, 2 to 17 days), with subsequent septic peritonitis, including 10 of 94 (10.6%) FEESAs and 3 of 50 (6.0%) HSAs. The incidence of postoperative dehiscence was not significantly different between FEESAs and HSAs; between anastomoses that underwent intraoperative leak testing and those that did not, regardless of anastomotic technique; or between anastomoses with positive and negative leak test results. Hand-sewn anastomoses were significantly more likely to undergo leak testing than FEESAs. Preoperative septic peritonitis, use of omental or serosal reinforcement, preoperative serum albumin concentration, and surgical indication were not significantly different between anastomotic techniques. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Performance of intraoperative anastomotic leak testing, regardless of the anastomotic technique, was not associated with a reduction in the incidence of postoperative anastomotic dehiscence.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33856865/