• 1. Brown DC. Small intestine. In: Tobias KM, Johnston SA, eds. Veterinary surgery: small animal. Vol 2. St Louis: Elsevier, 2012;15131541.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. 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
  • 3. Wylie K, Hosgood G. Mortality and morbidity of small and large intestinal surgery in dogs and cats: 74 cases (1980–1992). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1996;30:469474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. 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
  • 5. Boag AK, Coe RJ, Martinez TA, et al. Acid-base and electrolyte abnormalities in dogs with gastrointestinal foreign bodies. J Vet Intern Med 2005;19:816821.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. 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
  • 7. Allen D, Smeak D, Schertel E. 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
  • 8. Dayer T, Howard J, Spreng D. Septic peritonitis from pyloric and non-pyloric gastrointestinal perforation: prognostic factors in 44 dogs and 11 cats. J Small Anim Pract 2013;54:625629.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Adams RJ, Doyle RS, Bray JP, et al. Closed suction drainage for treatment of septic peritonitis of confirmed gastrointestinal origin in 20 dogs. Vet Surg 2014;43:843851.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock. JAMA 2016;315:801810.

    • 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. Tobias KM. Surgical stapling devices in veterinary medicine: a review. Vet Surg 2007;36:341349.

  • 13. 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
  • 14. 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
  • 15. Ehrhart NP, Kaminskaya K, Miller JA, et al. In vivo assessment of absorbable knotless barbed suture for single layer gastrotomy and enterotomy closure. Vet Surg 2013;42:210216.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Rashid RM, Sartori M, White LE, et al. Breaking strength of barbed polypropylene sutures: rater-blinded, controlled comparison with nonbarbed sutures of various calibers. Arch Dermatol 2007;143:869872.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. Tera H, Aberg C. The strength of suture knots after one week in vivo. Acta Chir Scand 1976;142:301307.

  • 18. 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
  • 19. Blake JS, Trumpatori BJ, Mathews KG, et al. Carotid artery bursting pressure and seal time after multiple uses of a vessel sealing device. Vet Surg 2017;46:501506.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20. 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
  • 21. 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
  • 22. Duffy DJ, Kindra CG, Moore GE. Comparison of initial leak pressures after single- and double-layer cystotomy closure with barbed and nonbarbed monofilament suture material in an ex vivo ovine model. Vet Surg 2019;48:424430.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Duffy DJ, Duddy HR, Keating S, et al. Influence of barbed suture on leak pressures after double-layer inverting closure of cystotomy sites in sheep. Vet Surg 2018;47:902907.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. 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
  • 25. Nelson BB, Hassel DM. In vitro comparison of V–LocTM versus BiosynTM in a one-layer end-to-end anastomosis of equine jejunum. Vet Surg 2014;43:8084.

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

  • 27. Goh KL, Chen Y, Chou SM, et al. Effects of frozen storage temperature on the elasticity of tendons from a small murine model. Animal 2010;4:16131617.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28. Saile K, Boothe HW, Boothe 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
  • 29. 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
  • 30. Chiba T, Sarr MG, Kendrick ML, et al. Limitations of implantable, miniature ultrasonic transducers to measure wall movement in the canine jejunum. J Surg Res 2004;116:219226.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31. Shikata J, Shida T, Amino K, et al. Experimental studies on the hemodynamics of the small intestine following increased intraluminal pressure. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1983;156:155160.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32. Mutascio LM, Breur GJ, Moore GE, et al. Effects of a surgical sealant on leakage pressure and circumference of fresh canine cadaver small intestinal anastomoses. Am J Vet Res 2018;79:13351340.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33. Medtronic. V–Loc product information guide. V–Loc 90 wound closure device. Available: at www.medtronic.com/covidien/en-us/products/wound-closure/barbed-sutures.html. Accessed Sep 12, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34. Kieves NR, Krebs AI. Comparison of leak pressures for single-layer simple continuous suture pattern for cystotomy closure using barbed and monofilament suture material in an ex vivo canine model. Vet Surg 2017;46:412416.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35. Quill Product Guide. Available: at www.surgicalspecialties. com/suture-wound-closure-brands/quill-barbed-sutures. Accessed Sep 12, 2019.

  • 36. Ruzickova P, Burns P, Piat P, et al. Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of 4 suture materials for laparoscopic bladder closure in the horse. Vet Surg 2016;45:374379.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Effect of presurgical storage conditions on leakage pressures of enterotomy sites closed with unidirectional barbed suture material in fresh, chilled, and frozen-thawed cadaveric canine jejunal specimens

Daniel J. Duffy BVM&s, MS1, Yi-Jen Chang BVetMed, MS1, Julie A. Balko VMD2, and George E. Moore DVM, PhD3
View More View Less
  • 1 1Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607.
  • | 2 2Department of Molecular and Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607.
  • | 3 3Department of Veterinary Administration, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of presurgical storage conditions on leakage pressures of enterotomy sites closed with unidirectional barbed suture material in fresh, chilled, and frozen-thawed cadaveric canine jejunal specimens.

SAMPLE

36 grossly normal jejunal segments obtained from 4 dog cadavers.

PROCEDURES

9 jejunal segments were harvested immediately from each euthanized dog and randomly assigned to be tested within 4 hours after collection (fresh segments), stored at 4°C for 24 hours before testing (chilled segments), or stored at −20°C for 7 days and thawed at 21°C for 6 hours before testing (frozen-thawed segments). For leakage pressure testing, a 3-cm-long antimesenteric enterotomy was performed and repaired with 3-0 unidirectional barbed suture material in a simple continuous pattern in each segment. Time to complete the enterotomy, initial leakage pressure, maximum intraluminal pressure, and leakage location were recorded for each segment.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD initial leakage pressure for fresh, chilled, and frozen-thawed segments was 52.8 ± 14.9 mm Hg, 51.8 ± 11.9 mm Hg, and 33.3 ± 7.7 mm Hg, respectively. Frozen-thawed segments had significantly lower mean initial leakage pressure, compared with findings for fresh or chilled segments. Time to complete the enterotomy, maximum intraluminal pressure, and leakage location did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Leak pressure testing of cadaveric jejunal segments that are fresh or chilled at 4°C for 24 hours is recommended for enterotomy studies involving barbed suture material in dogs. Freezing and thawing of cadaveric jejunal tissues prior to investigative use is not recommended because leak pressure data may be falsely low.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of presurgical storage conditions on leakage pressures of enterotomy sites closed with unidirectional barbed suture material in fresh, chilled, and frozen-thawed cadaveric canine jejunal specimens.

SAMPLE

36 grossly normal jejunal segments obtained from 4 dog cadavers.

PROCEDURES

9 jejunal segments were harvested immediately from each euthanized dog and randomly assigned to be tested within 4 hours after collection (fresh segments), stored at 4°C for 24 hours before testing (chilled segments), or stored at −20°C for 7 days and thawed at 21°C for 6 hours before testing (frozen-thawed segments). For leakage pressure testing, a 3-cm-long antimesenteric enterotomy was performed and repaired with 3-0 unidirectional barbed suture material in a simple continuous pattern in each segment. Time to complete the enterotomy, initial leakage pressure, maximum intraluminal pressure, and leakage location were recorded for each segment.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD initial leakage pressure for fresh, chilled, and frozen-thawed segments was 52.8 ± 14.9 mm Hg, 51.8 ± 11.9 mm Hg, and 33.3 ± 7.7 mm Hg, respectively. Frozen-thawed segments had significantly lower mean initial leakage pressure, compared with findings for fresh or chilled segments. Time to complete the enterotomy, maximum intraluminal pressure, and leakage location did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Leak pressure testing of cadaveric jejunal segments that are fresh or chilled at 4°C for 24 hours is recommended for enterotomy studies involving barbed suture material in dogs. Freezing and thawing of cadaveric jejunal tissues prior to investigative use is not recommended because leak pressure data may be falsely low.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Duffy (djduffy@ncsu.edu).