Addition of two full-thickness simple interrupted sutures to standard incisional gastropexy increases gastropexy biomechanical strength

Yi Pan Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO

Search for other papers by Yi Pan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
F. A. Mann Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO

Search for other papers by F. A. Mann in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS, DACVS, DACVECC
,
Colette Wagner-Mann Department of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO

Search for other papers by Colette Wagner-Mann in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
, and
R. A. Winholtz Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO

Search for other papers by R. A. Winholtz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the acute strength (failure load and work to failure) of standard incisional gastropexy (SIG) and modified incisional gastropexy (MIG).

ANIMALS

37 pig cadavers.

PROCEDURES

Stomachs and right abdominal walls were harvested from pigs euthanized for reasons unrelated to this study. The tissues were stored in lactated Ringer’s solution overnight in a 5 °C cooler. Matching body wall and stomach tissue pairs were randomized and divided into 2 groups, on which either SIG or MIG was performed the following day. The MIG technique was identical to SIG except 2 additional simple interrupted sutures, 1 cranial and 1 caudal to the continuous suture line, were placed full thickness into the stomach to ensure engagement of the submucosa. After gastropexy, the samples underwent biomechanical testing. Information regarding change in position and load was generated by the MTESTQuattro software. Mode of failure was examined after the procedure was complete.

RESULTS

The MIG had higher failure load and work to failure compared to SIG. All failures were caused by gastric tissue tearing.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The MIG is biomechanically superior to SIG and may provide more security than SIG during healing. However, clinical study is needed to ascertain if there is a difference in gastropexy failure and complications between these 2 techniques.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the acute strength (failure load and work to failure) of standard incisional gastropexy (SIG) and modified incisional gastropexy (MIG).

ANIMALS

37 pig cadavers.

PROCEDURES

Stomachs and right abdominal walls were harvested from pigs euthanized for reasons unrelated to this study. The tissues were stored in lactated Ringer’s solution overnight in a 5 °C cooler. Matching body wall and stomach tissue pairs were randomized and divided into 2 groups, on which either SIG or MIG was performed the following day. The MIG technique was identical to SIG except 2 additional simple interrupted sutures, 1 cranial and 1 caudal to the continuous suture line, were placed full thickness into the stomach to ensure engagement of the submucosa. After gastropexy, the samples underwent biomechanical testing. Information regarding change in position and load was generated by the MTESTQuattro software. Mode of failure was examined after the procedure was complete.

RESULTS

The MIG had higher failure load and work to failure compared to SIG. All failures were caused by gastric tissue tearing.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The MIG is biomechanically superior to SIG and may provide more security than SIG during healing. However, clinical study is needed to ascertain if there is a difference in gastropexy failure and complications between these 2 techniques.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Table S1 (PDF 125 KB)

Contributor Notes

Corresponding author: Dr. Pan (ypvcm@mail.missouri.edu)
  • 1.

    Mackenzie G, Barnhart M, Kennedy S, DeHoff W, Schertel E. A retrospective study of factors influencing survival following surgery for gastric dilatation-volvulus syndrome in 306 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2010;46(2):97-102. doi:10.5326/0460097

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Green TI, Tonozzi CC, Kirby R, Rudloff E. Evaluation of initial plasma lactate values as a predictor of gastric necrosis and initial and subsequent plasma lactate values as a predictor of survival in dogs with gastric dilatation-volvulus: 84 dogs (2003-2007). J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2011;21(1):36-44. doi:10.1111/j.1476-4431.2010.00599.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Adamik KN, Burgener IA, Kovacevic A, Schulze SP, Kohn B. Myoglobin as a prognostic indicator for outcome in dogs with gastric dilatation-volvulus. J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2009;19(3):247-253. doi:10.1111/j.1476-4431.2009.00421.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Buber T, Saragusty J, Ranen E, Epstein A, Bdolah-Abram T, Bruchim Y. Evaluation of lidocaine treatment and risk factors for death associated with gastric dilatation and volvulus in dogs: 112 cases (1997-2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2007;230(9):1334-1339. doi:10.2460/javma.230.9.1334

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Beck JJ, Staatz AJ, Pelsue DH, et al. Risk factors associated with short-term outcome and development of perioperative complications in dogs undergoing surgery because of gastric dilatation-volvulus: 166 cases (1992-2003). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006;229(12):1934-1939. doi:10.2460/javma.229.12.1934

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Smeak DD. Gastropexy. In: Monnet E, Smeak DD, eds. Gastrointestinal Surgical Techniques in Small Animals. Wiley Blackwell; 2020:165-178. doi:10.1002/9781119369257.ch23

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Allen P, Paul A. Gastropexy for prevention of gastric dilatation-volvulus in dogs: history and techniques. Top Companion Anim Med. 2014;29(3):77-80. doi:10.1053/j.tcam.2014.09.001

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Benitez ME, Schmiedt CW, Radlinsky MG, Cornell KK. Efficacy of incisional gastropexy for prevention of GDV in dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2013;49(3):185-189. doi:10.5326/JAAHA-MS-5849

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Glickman LT, Lantz GC, Schellenberg DB, Glickman NW. A prospective study of survival and recurrence following the acute gastric dilatation-volvulus syndrome in 136 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 1998;34(3):253-259. doi:10.5326/15473317-34-3-253

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Hammel SP, Novo RE. Recurrence of gastric dilatation-volvulus after incisional gastropexy in a Rottweiler. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2006;42(2):147-150. doi:10.5326/0420147

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Hoogzand J. A retrospective study of the recurrence rate of gastric-dilatation volvulus after incisional gastropexy in dogs. Master’s thesis. Utrecht University; 2016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Theisens L. Long term follow up after incisional gastropexy. Master’s thesis. Utrecht University; 2017.

  • 13.

    Degna MT, Formaggini L, Fondati A, et al. Using a modified gastropexy technique to prevent recurrence of gastric dilatation-volvulus in dogs. Vet Med. 2001;96(1):39-50.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Cornell K. Stomach. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, eds. Veterinary Surgery Small Animal. Elsevier; 2018:1700-1730.

  • 15.

    R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Version 4.2.0. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2022.

  • 16.

    Przywara JF, Abel SB, Peacock JT, Shott S. Occurrence and recurrence of gastric dilatation with or without volvulus after incisional gastropexy. Can Vet J. 2014;55(10):981-984.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Webb RJ, Monnet E. Influence of length of incision and number of suture lines on the biomechanical properties of incisional gastropexy. Vet Surg. 2019;48(6):933-937. doi:10.1111/vsu.13262

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Levine SH, Caywood DD. Biomechanical evaluation of gastropexy techniques in the dog. Vet Surg. 1983;12(3):166-169. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950X.1983.tb00733.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Waschak MJ, Payne JT, Pope ER, Jones BD, Wagner-Mann CC. Evaluation of percutaneous gastrostomy as a technique for permanent gastropexy. Vet Surg. 1997;26(3):235-241. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950x.1997.tb01491.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Bishop BA, Gallagher AE. Biomechanical comparison of two percutaneous gastropexy techniques for securing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in canine cadavers. Am J Vet Res. 2019;80(11):1020-1025. doi:10.2460/ajvr.80.11.1020

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Culp WT, Balsa IM, Kim SY, et al. Description and biomechanical comparison of a percutaneous radiologic gastropexy technique in a canine cadaver model. Vet Surg. 2016;45(4):456-463. doi:10.1111/vsu.12475

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Imhoff DJ, Cohen A, Monnet E. Biomechanical analysis of laparoscopic incisional gastropexy with intracorporeal suturing using knotless polyglyconate. Vet Surg. 2015;44(suppl 1):39-43. doi:10.1111/j.1532-950X.2014.12177.x

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Fracassi L, Crovace AM, Staffieri F, Lacitignola L. Biomechanical evaluation of an absorbable fixation strap for use in total laparoscopic gastropexy in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2020;81(7):594-599. doi:10.2460/ajvr.81.7.594

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Bellón JM, Rodríguez M, Serrano N, García-Honduvilla N, Gómez V, Buján J. Polypropylene and polydioxanone show similar biomechanical efficacy in midline closure [Polipropileno frente a polidioxanona: igual eficacia biomecánica en cierres de la línea media]. Cir Esp. 2005;78(6):377-381.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Cunningham DP, Middleton JR, Mann FA. A comparison of leak pressures between esophageal to esophageal anastomosis and esophageal to jejunal anastomosis. Korean J Vet Res. 2020;60(2):49-54. doi:10.14405/kjvr.2020.60.2.49

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Schenk AP, Mann FA, Middleton JR, Aeschlimann KA. 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(7):787-791. doi:10.2460/ajvr.79.7.787

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Aeschlimann KA, Mann FA, Middleton JR, Belter RC. Comparison of enterotomy leak pressure among fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed porcine jejunal segments. Am J Vet Res. 2018;79(5):576-580. doi:10.2460/ajvr.79.5.576

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement