Folded-flap palatoplasty is not superior to cut-and-sew staphylectomy for the treatment of brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome in English Bulldogs.

IF 1.6 2区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Janet A Grimes, Lisa R Reno, Mandy L Wallace, Brian J Sutherland, Rachel A Reed, Michael Perlini, Chad W Schmiedt
{"title":"Folded-flap palatoplasty is not superior to cut-and-sew staphylectomy for the treatment of brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome in English Bulldogs.","authors":"Janet A Grimes, Lisa R Reno, Mandy L Wallace, Brian J Sutherland, Rachel A Reed, Michael Perlini, Chad W Schmiedt","doi":"10.2460/javma.24.10.0686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether folded-flap palatoplasty (FFP) results in improved respiratory outcomes compared to standard staphylectomy (SS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>English Bulldogs were randomized to receive FFP or SS in a parallel, equal-allocation, prospective study design at a single institution. Exercise-tolerance testing (ETT), arterial blood gas, head CT, and an owner survey were completed preoperatively and at recheck (approx 30 days postoperatively). Soft palate (SP) length and thickness and pharyngeal air volume were measured on blinded CT images. Linear mixed models and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>16 dogs completed the study (FFP group, 8; SS group, 8) and 3 did not (excluded due to FFP dehiscence [2] and lack of recheck [1]). Median preoperative ETT grade was not different between groups (SS group, 1 [0 to 3]; FFP group, 1.5 [1 to 3]). Standard staphylectomy resulted in a greater reduction in SP length compared to FFP (P = .020; FFP, 5.79 ± 0.50 cm preoperatively, 4.86 ± 0.52 cm at recheck; SS, 6.13 ± 0.53 cm preoperatively, 4.57 ± 0.47 cm at recheck). No other variables differed between groups. At recheck, owners subjectively rated their dogs as improved (FFP group, 5; SS group, 8), unchanged (FFP group, 2), and not rated (FFP group, 1).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Folded-flap palatoplasty did not improve SP thickness, pharyngeal air volume, ETT, arterial blood gas values, or owner survey variables more than SS in these English Bulldogs. Standard staphylectomy resulted in a greater reduction in SP length than FFP.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Standard staphylectomy or FFP can be performed in English Bulldogs. Standard staphylectomy may be preferable due to dehiscence potential with FFP.</p>","PeriodicalId":14658,"journal":{"name":"Javma-journal of The American Veterinary Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":"612-618"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Javma-journal of The American Veterinary Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.24.10.0686","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether folded-flap palatoplasty (FFP) results in improved respiratory outcomes compared to standard staphylectomy (SS).

Methods: English Bulldogs were randomized to receive FFP or SS in a parallel, equal-allocation, prospective study design at a single institution. Exercise-tolerance testing (ETT), arterial blood gas, head CT, and an owner survey were completed preoperatively and at recheck (approx 30 days postoperatively). Soft palate (SP) length and thickness and pharyngeal air volume were measured on blinded CT images. Linear mixed models and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed.

Results: 16 dogs completed the study (FFP group, 8; SS group, 8) and 3 did not (excluded due to FFP dehiscence [2] and lack of recheck [1]). Median preoperative ETT grade was not different between groups (SS group, 1 [0 to 3]; FFP group, 1.5 [1 to 3]). Standard staphylectomy resulted in a greater reduction in SP length compared to FFP (P = .020; FFP, 5.79 ± 0.50 cm preoperatively, 4.86 ± 0.52 cm at recheck; SS, 6.13 ± 0.53 cm preoperatively, 4.57 ± 0.47 cm at recheck). No other variables differed between groups. At recheck, owners subjectively rated their dogs as improved (FFP group, 5; SS group, 8), unchanged (FFP group, 2), and not rated (FFP group, 1).

Conclusions: Folded-flap palatoplasty did not improve SP thickness, pharyngeal air volume, ETT, arterial blood gas values, or owner survey variables more than SS in these English Bulldogs. Standard staphylectomy resulted in a greater reduction in SP length than FFP.

Clinical relevance: Standard staphylectomy or FFP can be performed in English Bulldogs. Standard staphylectomy may be preferable due to dehiscence potential with FFP.

折叠皮瓣腭成形术并不优于切口缝合葡萄切开术治疗英国斗牛犬短头性阻塞性气道综合征。
目的:确定折叠皮瓣腭成形术(FFP)与标准葡萄摘除术(SS)相比是否能改善呼吸功能。方法:在单一机构采用平行、平均分配、前瞻性研究设计,将英国斗牛犬随机分为FFP或SS两组。术前和术后复查时(约30天)完成运动耐量测试(ETT)、动脉血气、头部CT和所有者调查。采用盲法CT图像测量软腭(SP)长度、厚度及咽气量。采用线性混合模型和Mann-Whitney U检验。结果:16只狗完成了研究(FFP组,8只;SS组,8)和3组没有(由于FFP破裂[2]和缺乏复查[1]而被排除在外)。两组间术前ETT评分中位数无差异(SS组,1 [0 ~ 3];FFP组,1.5[1 ~ 3])。与FFP相比,标准镫骨切除术导致的SP长度减少更大(P = 0.020;FFP术前5.79±0.50 cm,复诊时4.86±0.52 cm;SS:术前6.13±0.53 cm,复检4.57±0.47 cm)。两组之间没有其他变量差异。在复检时,主人主观地将他们的狗评为改善(FFP组,5;SS组,8),不变组(FFP组,2),未评分组(FFP组,1)。结论:与SS相比,折叠皮瓣腭成形术对这些英国斗牛犬的SP厚度、咽气量、ETT、动脉血气值或主人调查变量的改善作用不明显。与FFP相比,标准镫骨切除术导致的SP长度减少更大。临床相关性:标准葡萄切开术或FFP可以在英国斗牛犬中进行。由于FFP有开裂的可能,标准的葡萄切开术可能更可取。
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
15.80%
发文量
539
审稿时长
6-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Published twice monthly, this peer-reviewed, general scientific journal provides reports of clinical research, feature articles and regular columns of interest to veterinarians in private and public practice. The News and Classified Ad sections are posted online 10 days to two weeks before they are delivered in print.
×
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