• 1. Allen DA, Smeak DD, Schertel ER. Prevalence of small intestinal dehiscence and associated clinical factors: a retrospective study of 121 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1992;28:7076.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. Grimes JA, Schmiedt CW, Cornell KK, et al. Identification of risk factors for septic peritonitis and failure to survive following gastrointestinal surgery in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2011;238:486494.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. 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;223:7377.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Wylie KB, Hosgood G. Mortality and morbidity of small and large intestinal surgery in dogs and cats: 74 cases (1980–1992). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994;30:469474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Shales CJ, Warren J, Anderson DM, et al. Complications following full-thickness small intestinal biopsy in 66 dogs: a retrospective study. J Small Anim Pract 2005;46:317321.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Ellison GW. Intestinal obstruction. In: Bojrab MJ, ed. Disease mechanisms in small animal surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger, 1993;252257.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. Semevolos SA, Reed SK, Gamble K. In vitro bursting pressures of jejunal enterotomy closures in llamas. Vet Surg 2007;36:6467.

  • 8. Saile K, Boothe HW, Booth DM. Saline volume necessary to achieve predetermined intraluminal pressures during leak testing of small intestinal biopsy sites in the dog. Vet Surg 2010;39:900903.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Curran KM, Fransson BA, Gay JM. A comparison of in situ and in vitro techniques for bursting pressure testing of canine jejunum. Am J Vet Res 2010;71:370373.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Risselada M, Ellison GW, Winter MD, et al. In vitro evaluation of bursting pressure and intestinal luminal area of three jejunostomy tube placement techniques in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2015;76:467474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. Coolman BR, Ehrhart N, Pijanowski G, et al. Comparison of skin staples with sutures for anastomosis of the small intestine in dogs. Vet Surg 2000;29:293302.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Gandini M, Bertuglia A. In vitro evaluation of an inverted end-to-end equine jejunojejunal anastomosis using skin staples. Vet Surg 2006;35:678682.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Hansen LA, Smeak DD. In vitro comparison of leakage pressure and leakage location for various staple line offset configurations in functional end-to-end stapled small intestinal anastomoses of canine tissues. Am J Vet Res 2015;76:644648.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Hansen LA, Monnet EL. Evaluation of serosal patch supplementation of surgical anastomosis in intestinal segments from canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res 2013;74:11381141.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. Hansen LA, Monnet EL. Evaluation of a novel suture material for closure of intestinal anastomoses in canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res 2012;73:18191823.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Matz BM, Boothe HW, Wright JC, et al. Effect of enteric biopsy closure orientation on enteric circumference and volume of saline needed for leak testing. Can Vet J 2014;55:12551257.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. Demyttenaere SV, Nau P, Henn M, et al. Barbed suture for gastrointestinal closure: a randomized control trial. Surg Innov 2009;16:237242.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Comparison of enterotomy leak pressure among fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed porcine jejunal segments

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.
  • | 2 Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.
  • | 3 Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.
  • | 4 Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine whether stored (cooled or frozen-thawed) jejunal segments can be used to obtain dependable leak pressure data after enterotomy closure.

SAMPLE 36 jejunal segments from 3 juvenile pigs.

PROCEDURES Jejunal segments were harvested from euthanized pigs and assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups (n = 12 segments/group) as follows: fresh (used within 4 hours after collection), cooled (stored overnight at 5°C before use), and frozen-thawed (frozen at −12°C for 8 days and thawed at room temperature [23°C] for 1 hour before use). Jejunal segments were suspended and 2-cm enterotomy incisions were made on the antimesenteric border. Enterotomies were closed with a simple continuous suture pattern. Lactated Ringer solution was infused into each segment until failure at the suture line was detected. Leak pressure was measured by use of a digital transducer.

RESULTS Mean ± SD leak pressure for fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed segments was 68.3 ± 23.7 mm Hg, 55.3 ± 28.1 mm Hg, and 14.4 ± 14.8 mm Hg, respectively. Overall, there were no significant differences in mean leak pressure among pigs, but a significant difference in mean leak pressure was detected among treatment groups. Mean leak pressure was significantly lower for frozen-thawed segments than for fresh or cooled segments, but mean leak pressure did not differ significantly between fresh and cooled segments.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Fresh porcine jejunal segments or segments cooled overnight may be used for determining intestinal leak pressure, but frozen-thawed segments should not be used.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine whether stored (cooled or frozen-thawed) jejunal segments can be used to obtain dependable leak pressure data after enterotomy closure.

SAMPLE 36 jejunal segments from 3 juvenile pigs.

PROCEDURES Jejunal segments were harvested from euthanized pigs and assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups (n = 12 segments/group) as follows: fresh (used within 4 hours after collection), cooled (stored overnight at 5°C before use), and frozen-thawed (frozen at −12°C for 8 days and thawed at room temperature [23°C] for 1 hour before use). Jejunal segments were suspended and 2-cm enterotomy incisions were made on the antimesenteric border. Enterotomies were closed with a simple continuous suture pattern. Lactated Ringer solution was infused into each segment until failure at the suture line was detected. Leak pressure was measured by use of a digital transducer.

RESULTS Mean ± SD leak pressure for fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed segments was 68.3 ± 23.7 mm Hg, 55.3 ± 28.1 mm Hg, and 14.4 ± 14.8 mm Hg, respectively. Overall, there were no significant differences in mean leak pressure among pigs, but a significant difference in mean leak pressure was detected among treatment groups. Mean leak pressure was significantly lower for frozen-thawed segments than for fresh or cooled segments, but mean leak pressure did not differ significantly between fresh and cooled segments.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Fresh porcine jejunal segments or segments cooled overnight may be used for determining intestinal leak pressure, but frozen-thawed segments should not be used.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Aeschlimann (aeschlimannk@missouri.edu).