Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for
- Author or Editor: Lane A. Hansen x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
Objective—To compare leakage and maximum intraluminal pressures for a novel suture material with pressures for comparable suture material when used in closure of intestinal anastomoses in canine cadavers.
Sample—Healthy intestines from cadavers of dogs euthanized for reasons unrelated to the study.
Procedures—18 anastomoses were performed on intestinal sections within 72 hours after dogs were euthanized and intestinal samples collected. Anastomoses were performed with a simple continuous suture pattern. Leakage and maximum intraluminal pressures were measured and recorded for 6 control segments and 18 anastomosed sections. A barbed glycomer 631 suture (size 4–0 United States Pharmacopeia [USP]) was compared with glycomer 631 sutures (sizes 3–0 and 4–0 USP). Results for leakage and maximum intraluminal pressures were compared via an ANOVA.
Results—The barbed glycomer 631 suture material leaked at a significantly higher pressure than did the comparable glycomer 631 suture materials. Maximum intraluminal pressures were not significantly different among the suture materials.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Barbed glycomer 631 4–0 USP suture material was as effective as glycomer 631 suture materials and may be a safe alternative for use in closure of enterectomies in dogs.
Abstract
Objective—To compare leakage and maximum intraluminal pressures of intestinal anastomoses with and without serosal patch supplementation in dogs.
Sample—Healthy small intestine segments from cadavers of 2 dogs euthanized for reasons unrelated to the study.
Procedures—12 enterectomy constructs were created by anastomosis of intestinal segments with a standard simple continuous suture pattern. Half of the constructs were randomly selected for additional serosal patch support. Leakage and maximum intraluminal pressures were measured in and compared between patch-supplemented and nonsupplemented constructs.
Results—Mean ± SD leakage pressure was significantly greater for the patch-supplemented anastomoses (81.8 ± 6.7 mm Hg) than for the nonsupplemented anastomoses (28.0 ± 6.7 mm Hg). Maximum intraluminal pressures were not significantly different between the groups.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Serosal patch–supplemented anastomoses were able to sustain a significantly higher pressure before leakage than were nonsupplemented anastomoses in intestinal specimens from canine cadavers. The serosal patch supplementation may protect against leakage immediately after enterectomy in dogs.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare intraluminal pressure at initial leakage (leakage pressure), leakage location, and maximum intraluminal pressure (MIP) for various staple line offset configurations of functional end-to-end stapled anastomosis (FEESA).
SAMPLE Grossly normal jejunal segments from 4 canine cadavers.
PROCEDURES 52 jejunal segments (4 control and 24 anastomosis constructs [2 segments/standard FEESA construct]) were prepared for testing. Segments were assigned to three 8-segment gastrointestinal anastomosis staple line offset groups: complete offset (CSO group), partial gastrointestinal anastomosis offset (PSO group), and no gastrointestinal anastomosis offset (NSO group). Results for leakage pressure, leakage location, and MIP were compared.
RESULTS Mean ± SD leakage pressure differed significantly among all groups and was highest for the PSO group (34.4 ± 3.7 mm Hg), followed by the CSO group (25.9 ± 4.1 mm Hg) and the NSO group (18.8 ± 1.5 mm Hg). Leakage location did not differ significantly among groups but was most commonly associated with the thoracoabdominal staple line. The MIP did not differ significantly among groups (PSO, 83.1 ± 9.4 mm Hg; CSO, 81.7 ± 6.7 mm Hg; and NSO, 58.5 ± 7.7 mm Hg).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE In this study, partial staple line offset leaked at a significantly higher pressure, which represented the greatest leakage protection of tested constructs. The thoracoabdominal staple line was more susceptible to leakage than was the gastrointestinal anastomosis staple line. Results suggested that surgeons should avoid FEESA with no staple line offset, strive for partial offset of the gastrointestinal anastomosis staples, and provide precise placement of the thoracoabdominal staple line.
