Intestinal incisional dehiscence rate following enterotomy for foreign body removal in 247 dogs

Alena Strelchik 1Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845.

Search for other papers by Alena Strelchik in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Michelle C. Coleman 2Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845.

Search for other papers by Michelle C. Coleman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
,
Valery F. Scharf 3Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607.

Search for other papers by Valery F. Scharf in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
,
Regan M. Stoneburner 3Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27607.

Search for other papers by Regan M. Stoneburner in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Kelley M. Thieman Mankin 1Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845.

Search for other papers by Kelley M. Thieman Mankin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To report the intestinal incisional dehiscence rate following enterotomy for foreign body removal in dogs.

ANIMALS

247 client-owned dogs with intestinal foreign bodies treated with enterotomy between November 2001 and September 2017.

PROCEDURES

Medical records were reviewed, and data were collected regarding signalment, history, surgery, clinicopathologic findings, hospitalization, intestinal incisional dehiscence, and survival to hospital discharge. Dogs were grouped according to whether intestinal incisional dehiscence occurred (dehiscence group) or did not occur (nondehiscence group) following enterotomy, and the rate of dehiscence for the total number of enterotomies during the study period was calculated. Univariable analysis was performed to identify variables associated with intestinal incisional dehiscence.

RESULTS

8 of the 247 (3.2%) dogs had preoperative septic peritonitis, and all 8 dogs survived to hospital discharge. Incisional dehiscence occurred following 5 of the 247 (2.0%) enterotomies, and only 2 dogs in the dehiscence group did not survive to hospital discharge. Duration of hospitalization was longer for dogs in the dehiscence group than for dogs in the nondehiscence group.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results indicated that enterotomy for intestinal foreign body removal had a lower rate of dehiscence in dogs during the study period, compared with rates previously reported; however, the low rate should not be used as a reason to perform an enterotomy rather than an enterectomy when needed. Surgeons should thoroughly evaluate the bowel and perform an enterotomy only when indicated.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To report the intestinal incisional dehiscence rate following enterotomy for foreign body removal in dogs.

ANIMALS

247 client-owned dogs with intestinal foreign bodies treated with enterotomy between November 2001 and September 2017.

PROCEDURES

Medical records were reviewed, and data were collected regarding signalment, history, surgery, clinicopathologic findings, hospitalization, intestinal incisional dehiscence, and survival to hospital discharge. Dogs were grouped according to whether intestinal incisional dehiscence occurred (dehiscence group) or did not occur (nondehiscence group) following enterotomy, and the rate of dehiscence for the total number of enterotomies during the study period was calculated. Univariable analysis was performed to identify variables associated with intestinal incisional dehiscence.

RESULTS

8 of the 247 (3.2%) dogs had preoperative septic peritonitis, and all 8 dogs survived to hospital discharge. Incisional dehiscence occurred following 5 of the 247 (2.0%) enterotomies, and only 2 dogs in the dehiscence group did not survive to hospital discharge. Duration of hospitalization was longer for dogs in the dehiscence group than for dogs in the nondehiscence group.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results indicated that enterotomy for intestinal foreign body removal had a lower rate of dehiscence in dogs during the study period, compared with rates previously reported; however, the low rate should not be used as a reason to perform an enterotomy rather than an enterectomy when needed. Surgeons should thoroughly evaluate the bowel and perform an enterotomy only when indicated.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Strelchick's present address is Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.

Address correspondence to Dr. Thieman Mankin (kthieman@cvm.tamu.edu).
  • 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.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. Wylie KB, Hosgood G. Mortality and morbidity of small and large intestinal surgery in dogs and cats: 74 cases (1980–1982). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994;30:469474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Brown DC. Small intestine. In: Tobias KM, Johnston SA, eds. Veterinary surgery: small animal. St Louis: Elsevier, 2011;15131541.

  • 5. 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.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Duell JR, Thieman Mankin KM, Rochat MC, et al. Frequency of dehiscence in hand-sutured and stapled intestinal anastomoses in dogs. Vet Surg 2016;45:100103.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. Davis DJ, Demianiuk RM, Musser J, et al. Influence of preoperative septic peritonitis and anastomotic technique on the dehiscence of enterectomy sites in dogs: a retrospective review of 210 anastomoses. Vet Surg 2018;47:125129.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Snowdon KA, Smeak DD, Chiang S. Risk factors for dehiscence of stapled functional end-to-end intestinal anastomoses in dogs: 53 cases (2001–2012). Vet Surg 2016;45:9199.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Papazoglou LG, Mann FA, Wagner-Mann C, et al. Long-term survival of dogs after cholecystoenterostomy: a retrospective study of 15 cases (1981–2005). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2008;44:6774.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Lanz OI, Ellison GW, Bellah JR, et al. Surgical treatment of septic peritonitis without abdominal drainage in 28 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2001;37:8792.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement