Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Nonporous wrap does not prevent low body temperature in dogs
By Bartels, Courtney M et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2025·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Prospective evaluation of nonporous wrap fails to minimize inadvertent perianesthetic hypothermia in healthy canine patients undergoing ovariohysterectomy.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of healthy dogs undergoing spay surgery (ovariohysterectomy) were monitored for body temperature to see if a special nonporous wrap could help keep them warm during the procedure. Despite using active warming methods, the wrap did not significantly prevent drops in body temperature. The dogs' temperatures still decreased, with no complications reported from using the wrap. This means that while the wrap was tested, it didn't provide any extra benefit in keeping the dogs warm during surgery.
People also search for: dog spay surgery temperature drop · how to keep my dog warm during surgery · ovariohysterectomy recovery for dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate a nonporous wrap's ability to prevent inadvertent perianesthetic hypothermia (IPH) in canines undergoing ovariohysterectomy. METHODS: All client-owned canines and felines undergoing ovariohysterectomy performed by preclinical veterinary students at Michigan State University between November 2022 and November 2023 were prospectively enrolled into 1 of 4 treatment groups using block randomization. Patients were excluded if they were unamenable to rectal temperatures, had a body temperature ≥ 103.5 °F (39.7 °C), had incomplete medical records, or were a feline. All patients received intraoperative active warming via a circulating warm water blanket (AW). Experimental treatment groups were supplemented with nonporous wrap placed to either the distal extremities (AW+Limbs), around the head (AW+Head), or to the distal extremities and head (AW+Limbs+Head). Core temperatures were monitored from intubation to extubation. Normality was verified with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Analysis included ANOVA/ANCOVA and regression. Continuous variables were centered for analysis. RESULTS: 50 canines were enrolled. No statistically significant difference in preventing IPH with the use of supplemental nonporous wrap was identified. The decreases in rectal temperatures were 3.8 °F (AW), 3.7 °F (AW+Limbs), 5.3 °F (AW+Head), and 4.1 °F (AW+Limbs+Head). No intraoperative or postoperative complications associated with wrap placement were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Placing nonporous wrap on canines undergoing ovariohysterectomy resulted in no statistically significant benefit in combating IPH. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Supplementing active warming with a nonporous wrap placed to enable evaluation of a blink reflex cannot be recommended at this time.
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/40816332/