Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Gastrostomy tube use in dogs with septic peritonitis outcomes
By Hansen, Sonya C et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)·2019·Department of Clinical Sciences·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Retrospective evaluation of 24 cases of gastrostomy tube usage in dogs with septic peritonitis (2009-2016).
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 24 dogs with septic peritonitis (a serious abdominal infection) had gastrostomy tubes (GT) placed during surgery to help them eat after their condition. Most of the dogs, about 75%, survived and were able to go home, although half experienced some complications related to the tubes or other issues like vomiting. The study found that the sooner the dogs started eating after getting the GT, the better their chances of recovery. Overall, the use of GTs was beneficial and had mostly minor complications, making it a helpful option for these dogs.
People also search for: dog septic peritonitis treatment · gastrostomy tube for dogs · dog vomiting after surgery
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the postoperative use of gastrostomy tubes (GT) in dogs with septic peritonitis. A secondary objective was to identify factors associated with GT placement and use that may be related to outcome. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: University teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Twenty-four dogs diagnosed with septic peritonitis with GT placement at the time of exploratory laparotomy. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen dogs (75%) survived to discharge. Eighteen dogs (75%) had a gastrointestinal source of septic peritonitis. Complications were reported in 12/24 (50%) patients. Four dogs (16.6%) had non-GT-related complications such as vomiting, regurgitation, or increased gastric residual volume. GT-related complications occurred in 8/24 (33.3%) dogs, the majority of which (6/8 [75%]) were minor and did not necessitate removal of the GT. Two dogs had major complications that required removal of the GT. Significant differences between survivors and nonsurvivors were found between the length of time after placement of the GT to when they began eating and outcome (discharge versus death versus euthanasia) (P = 0.03), and GT dwell time (length of time the GT was in place) and outcome (P = 0.006). Clinically relevant correlations were found between the time after placement of the GT until feeding and time after placement until voluntarily eating (P = 0.0349), time after placement of the GT until voluntarily eating and length of hospitalization (P = 0.0391), and time after placement of the GT until feeding and length of hospitalization (P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: GTs can be placed during exploratory laparotomy in dogs with septic peritonitis. They facilitate early enteral nutrition and are associated with few clinically significant complications. Prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal postoperative feeding plan and the effects of early enteral nutrition on serum albumin concentration in this patient population.
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/31448863/