• 1. Cornell K. Stomach. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, eds. Saunders veterinary surgery: small animal. 2nd ed. St Louis: Elsevier, 2017;45944670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. Jones SA, Gazzaniga AB, Keller TB. The serosal patch. A surgical parachute. Am J Surg 1973;126:186196.

  • 3. Walley BD, Goco I. Duodenal patch grafting. Am J Surg 1980;140:706708.

  • 4. Ziaian B, Hosseinzadeh M, Nikravesh B, et al. Assessing two methods of repair of duodenal defects, jejunal serosal patch and jejunal pedicled flap (an experimental animal study). J Pak Med Assoc 2014;64:907910.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Astarcio lu H, Koçdor MA, Sökmen S, et al. Comparison of different surgical repairs in the treatment of experimental duodenal injuries. Am J Surg 2001;181:309312.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Crowe DT Jr. The serosal patch: clinical use in 12 animals. Vet Surg 1984;13:2938.

  • 7. Hansen LA, Monnet EL. Evaluation of serosal patch supplementation of surgical anastomoses in intestinal segments from canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res 2013;74:11381141.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Grimes J, Schmiedt C, Milovancev M, et al. Efficacy of serosal patching in dogs with septic peritonitis. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2013;49:246249.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Briscoe JA, Bennett RA. Use of a duodenal serosal patch in the repair of a colon rupture in a female Solomon Island eclectus parrot. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2011;238:922926.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. 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
  • 11. Bender HW, Sebor J, Zuidema GD. Serosal patch grafting for closure of posterior duodenal defects. Am J Surg 1968;115:103107.

  • 12. Pozzi A, Smeak DD, Aper R. Colonic seromuscular augmentation cystoplasty following subtotal cystectomy for treatment of bladder necrosis caused by bladder torsion in a dog. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;229:235239.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Camp TF Jr, Skinner DB, Connolly JM. Lateral duodenal defects. Am J Surg 1968;115:291294.

  • 14. Hosseini SV, Abbasi HR, Rezvani H, et al. Comparison between gallbladder serosal and mucosal patch in duodenal injuries repair in dogs. J Invest Surg 2009;22:148153.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. Nikeghbalian S, Atefi S, Kazemi K, et al. Repairing large duodenal injuries in dogs by expanded polytetrafluoroethylene patch. J Surg Res 2007;144:1721.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Yin WY, Huang SM, Chang TW, et al. Transverse abdominis musculo-peritoneal (TRAMP) flap for the repair of large duodenal defects. J Trauma 1996;40:973976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. Aeschlimann KA, Mann FA, Middleton JR, et al. Comparison of enterotomy leak pressure among fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed porcine jejunal segments. Am J Vet Res 2018;79:576580.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. 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
  • 19. 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
  • 20. Hansen LA, Monnet EL. Evaluation of serosal patch supplementation of surgical anastomoses in intestinal segments from canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res 2013;74:11381141.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21. Tasaka K, Farrar JT. Intraluminal pressure of the small intestine of the unanesthetized dog. Pflugers Arch 1976;364:3544.

  • 22. Duffy DJ, Chang Y-J, Balko JA, et al. Ex vivo comparison of the effect of storage temperature on canine intestinal leakage pressures. Vet Surg 2020;49:496501.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Kieves NR, Krebs AI, Zellner EM. A comparison of ex vivo leak pressures for four enterotomy closures in a canine model. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2018;54:7176.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. Schenck AP, Mann FA, Middleton JR, et al. Evaluation of leak pressure and closure time for double-layer esophagotomy closure with an interrupted or a continuous suture pattern. Am J Vet Res 2018;79:787791.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25. Egorov VI, Schastlivtsev V, Turusov RA, et al. Participation of the intestinal layers in supplying of the mechanical strength of the intact and sutured gut. Eur Surg Res 2002;34:425431.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26. Giuffrida MA, Brown DC. Small intestine. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, eds. Saunders veterinary surgery: small animal. 2nd ed. St Louis: Elsevier, 2017;17321760.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27. Radlinsky MG. Surgery of the digestive system. In: Fossum TW, ed. Small animal surgery. 4th ed. St Louis: Elsevier Mosby, 2013;392618.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28. Khan MA, Garner J, Kelty C. Management of duodenal injuries. Trauma 2011;14:315.

  • 29. Mayhew PD, Weisse C. Liver and biliary system. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, eds. Saunders veterinary surgery: small animal. 2nd ed. St Louis: Elsevier, 2017;18291851.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30. Walter MC, Matthiesen DT, Stone EA. Pylorectomy and gastroduodenostomy in the dog: technique and clinical results in 28 dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1985;187:909914.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Comparison of a simple continuous versus simple interrupted suture pattern for the repair of a large, open duodenal defect with a jejunal serosal patch in a canine cadaveric model

Maxime Lorange DVM, MS1 and Daniel D. Smeak DVM1
View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether jejunal serosal patches could securely seal large, open defects in duodenal segments harvested from canine cadavers and to compare intraluminal pressures at which leakage first occurred and maximal intraluminal pressures for repaired duodenal segments between 2 suture patterns.

SAMPLE

Duodenal and jejunal segments from 9 canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES

20 constructs were created through repair of large, open duodenal defects with circumferential suturing of an intact jejunal segment (jejunal serosal patch). Constructs were randomly assigned to have the serosal patch anastomosed to the duodenal segment by a simple continuous or simple interrupted suture pattern. The pressure at which the first leakage was observed and the maximum pressure obtained during testing were recorded and compared between suture patterns.

RESULTS

Initial leakage pressure was significantly higher with the simple interrupted pattern (mean ± SD, 68.89 ± 5.62 mm Hg), compared with the simple continuous pattern (59.8 ± 20.03 mm Hg). Maximum intraluminal pressures did not significantly differ between the simple interrupted (91 ± 8.27 mm Hg) and simple continuous patterns (90.7 ± 16.91 mm Hg). All constructs, regardless of suture pattern, withstood supraphysiologic pressures.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Jejunal serosal patches adequately sealed large, open duodenal defects and prevented leakage in these constructs. Constructs with simple continuous or simple interrupted suture patterns withstood physiologic and supraphysiologic intraluminal pressures, although constructs with a simple interrupted suture pattern initially leaked at higher pressures. (Am J Vet Res 2020;81:985–991)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether jejunal serosal patches could securely seal large, open defects in duodenal segments harvested from canine cadavers and to compare intraluminal pressures at which leakage first occurred and maximal intraluminal pressures for repaired duodenal segments between 2 suture patterns.

SAMPLE

Duodenal and jejunal segments from 9 canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES

20 constructs were created through repair of large, open duodenal defects with circumferential suturing of an intact jejunal segment (jejunal serosal patch). Constructs were randomly assigned to have the serosal patch anastomosed to the duodenal segment by a simple continuous or simple interrupted suture pattern. The pressure at which the first leakage was observed and the maximum pressure obtained during testing were recorded and compared between suture patterns.

RESULTS

Initial leakage pressure was significantly higher with the simple interrupted pattern (mean ± SD, 68.89 ± 5.62 mm Hg), compared with the simple continuous pattern (59.8 ± 20.03 mm Hg). Maximum intraluminal pressures did not significantly differ between the simple interrupted (91 ± 8.27 mm Hg) and simple continuous patterns (90.7 ± 16.91 mm Hg). All constructs, regardless of suture pattern, withstood supraphysiologic pressures.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Jejunal serosal patches adequately sealed large, open duodenal defects and prevented leakage in these constructs. Constructs with simple continuous or simple interrupted suture patterns withstood physiologic and supraphysiologic intraluminal pressures, although constructs with a simple interrupted suture pattern initially leaked at higher pressures. (Am J Vet Res 2020;81:985–991)

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Smeak (dan.smeak@colostate.edu).