Paramedian incisional complications after prophylactic laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy in 411 dogs.

Jessica Baron, S. Casale, E. Monnet, P. Mayhew, J. Runge, Christelle M Follette, K. Phipps, M. Powell, Alicja I Reczynska, N. Squire, B. Barton, J. Berg
{"title":"Paramedian incisional complications after prophylactic laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy in 411 dogs.","authors":"Jessica Baron, S. Casale, E. Monnet, P. Mayhew, J. Runge, Christelle M Follette, K. Phipps, M. Powell, Alicja I Reczynska, N. Squire, B. Barton, J. Berg","doi":"10.1111/vsu.13348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo determine the frequency and types of paramedian incisional complications after prophylactic laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (LAG) in dogs and to evaluate potential risk factors for complications.\n\n\nSTUDY DESIGN\nMulti-institutional retrospective study.\n\n\nANIMALS\nClient-owned dogs (N = 411).\n\n\nMETHODS\nRecords for dogs that underwent single-incision-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (SIPLAG) or multiple-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (MPLAG) at five veterinary referral hospitals were reviewed. Information regarding signalment, surgical procedures, perioperative care, and incisional complications was collected. Follow-up information was obtained by review of medical records and/or communication with owners. Potential risk factors for complications were examined statistically.\n\n\nRESULTS\nParamedian incisional complications were observed in 78 of 411 (19%) dogs. The most common complication was seroma formation, which occurred in 51 (12.4%) dogs. Surgical site infections were observed in 16 (3.9%) dogs, and dehiscence or development of excessive scar tissue at the incision site were each observed in nine (2.2%) dogs. Complications resolved with conservative treatment in 75 of 78 (96.2%) dogs and with surgical treatment in three of 78 (3.8%) dogs. The odds of complications were approximately twice as high in dogs undergoing SIPLAG than in dogs undergoing MPLAG (odds ratio, 2.03; P = .006).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nMinor paramedian incisional complications, particularly seroma formation, were frequently observed after LAG. Most complications were successfully managed conservatively. Single-incision-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy was associated with a higher complication rate compared with MPLAG.\n\n\nCLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE\nOwners should be informed that there is a relatively high rate of minor paramedian incisional complications after LAG. The risk of complications appears to be higher for SIPLAG than for MPLAG.","PeriodicalId":123280,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary surgery : VS","volume":"192 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary surgery : VS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.13348","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine the frequency and types of paramedian incisional complications after prophylactic laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (LAG) in dogs and to evaluate potential risk factors for complications. STUDY DESIGN Multi-institutional retrospective study. ANIMALS Client-owned dogs (N = 411). METHODS Records for dogs that underwent single-incision-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (SIPLAG) or multiple-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy (MPLAG) at five veterinary referral hospitals were reviewed. Information regarding signalment, surgical procedures, perioperative care, and incisional complications was collected. Follow-up information was obtained by review of medical records and/or communication with owners. Potential risk factors for complications were examined statistically. RESULTS Paramedian incisional complications were observed in 78 of 411 (19%) dogs. The most common complication was seroma formation, which occurred in 51 (12.4%) dogs. Surgical site infections were observed in 16 (3.9%) dogs, and dehiscence or development of excessive scar tissue at the incision site were each observed in nine (2.2%) dogs. Complications resolved with conservative treatment in 75 of 78 (96.2%) dogs and with surgical treatment in three of 78 (3.8%) dogs. The odds of complications were approximately twice as high in dogs undergoing SIPLAG than in dogs undergoing MPLAG (odds ratio, 2.03; P = .006). CONCLUSION Minor paramedian incisional complications, particularly seroma formation, were frequently observed after LAG. Most complications were successfully managed conservatively. Single-incision-port laparoscopy-assisted gastropexy was associated with a higher complication rate compared with MPLAG. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Owners should be informed that there is a relatively high rate of minor paramedian incisional complications after LAG. The risk of complications appears to be higher for SIPLAG than for MPLAG.
预防性腹腔镜辅助胃灌胃术411例临床观察
目的了解犬预防性腹腔镜辅助胃固定术(LAG)术后旁诊切口并发症的发生频率和类型,并探讨并发症的潜在危险因素。研究设计:多机构回顾性研究。动物:科学家拥有的狗(N = 411)。方法回顾性分析5家兽医转诊医院对犬行单口腹腔镜辅助胃固定术(SIPLAG)或多口腹腔镜辅助胃固定术(MPLAG)的记录。收集有关信号、手术程序、围手术期护理和切口并发症的信息。通过审查医疗记录和(或)与业主沟通获得后续信息。对并发症的潜在危险因素进行统计学分析。结果411只狗中有78只(19%)出现中等切口并发症。最常见的并发症是血清肿形成,51只(12.4%)狗发生血清肿。16只(3.9%)犬出现手术部位感染,9只(2.2%)犬出现切口处瘢痕组织破裂或发育过度。78只狗中75只(96.2%)经保守治疗后并发症消失,78只狗中3只(3.8%)经手术治疗后并发症消失。SIPLAG犬的并发症发生率约为MPLAG犬的两倍(优势比,2.03;P = .006)。结论LAG术后常出现轻微的切口并发症,尤其是血清肿的形成。大多数并发症均经保守治疗成功。与MPLAG相比,单切口腹腔镜辅助胃固定术的并发症发生率更高。临床意义车主应该被告知,LAG术后轻微的辅助切口并发症发生率相对较高。SIPLAG的并发症风险似乎高于MPLAG。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信