Philipp D Mayhew1, Lynetta Freeman, Toni Kwan, Dorothy C Brown. 1. Matthew J. Ryan Veterinary Hospital, Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. philmayhew@gmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report and compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rates for clean and clean-contaminated procedures performed by either a minimally invasive surgical or open surgical approach in a large population of dogs and cats. DESIGN: Prospective case series. ANIMALS: 179 patients (dogs and cats) undergoing minimally invasive abdominal or thoracic surgery. PROCEDURES: Case information from all animals that underwent minimally invasive abdominal or thoracic surgery was prospectively collected and compared with an existing database of the same information collected from 379 patients undergoing laparotomy or thoracotomy via an open surgical approach. For both groups, an SSI was defined as any surgical wound in which purulent discharge was observed within 14 days after the procedure. Follow-up for all patients was obtained by direct examination or telephone interviews. RESULTS: Overall SSI rate in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group was 1.7% and in the open surgery (OS) group was 5.5%. On univariate analysis, there was a significantly lower SSI rate in the MIS group, compared with the SSI rate for the OS group. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, this difference appeared to be a result of the fact that surgery times were longer (median, 105 vs 75 minutes) and hair was clipped ≥ 4 hours prior to surgery for more animals (23% vs 11 %) in the OS group, compared with the MIS group. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MIS may be associated with a lower SSI rate, compared with OS, but confounding factors such as differences in surgery time and preoperative preparation contributed in part to this finding. As such, surgical approach cannot be categorized as an independent risk factor for SSIs in small animals until further studies are performed.
OBJECTIVE: To report and compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rates for clean and clean-contaminated procedures performed by either a minimally invasive surgical or open surgical approach in a large population of dogs and cats. DESIGN: Prospective case series. ANIMALS: 179 patients (dogs and cats) undergoing minimally invasive abdominal or thoracic surgery. PROCEDURES: Case information from all animals that underwent minimally invasive abdominal or thoracic surgery was prospectively collected and compared with an existing database of the same information collected from 379 patients undergoing laparotomy or thoracotomy via an open surgical approach. For both groups, an SSI was defined as any surgical wound in which purulent discharge was observed within 14 days after the procedure. Follow-up for all patients was obtained by direct examination or telephone interviews. RESULTS: Overall SSI rate in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group was 1.7% and in the open surgery (OS) group was 5.5%. On univariate analysis, there was a significantly lower SSI rate in the MIS group, compared with the SSI rate for the OS group. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, this difference appeared to be a result of the fact that surgery times were longer (median, 105 vs 75 minutes) and hair was clipped ≥ 4 hours prior to surgery for more animals (23% vs 11 %) in the OS group, compared with the MIS group. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MIS may be associated with a lower SSI rate, compared with OS, but confounding factors such as differences in surgery time and preoperative preparation contributed in part to this finding. As such, surgical approach cannot be categorized as an independent risk factor for SSIs in small animals until further studies are performed.
Authors: Brenda L Kick; Sanjeev Gumber; Heqiong Wang; Reneé H Moore; Douglas K Taylor Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2019-01-04 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Zoë A Launcelott; Jonathan Lustgarten; Jed Sung; Sirrika Samuels; Spencer Davis; Garrett J Davis Journal: Can Vet J Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 1.008
Authors: Edward Hart; Ameet Singh; Andrew Peregrine; Andrea Sanchez; Alex Zur Linden; Monica Jensen; Ryan Appleby; Christopher R M Hagen; Jennifer Wan; Philippe Larose Journal: Can Vet J Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 1.008
Authors: Lee B Meakin; Jo C Murrell; Ivan C P Doran; Toby G Knowles; Michael S Tivers; Guillaume P A Chanoit Journal: Vet Surg Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 1.495
Authors: Marthinus Jacobus Hartman; Eric Monnet; Robert Murco Kirberger; Johan Petrus Schoeman Journal: Acta Vet Scand Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 1.695
Authors: Jorge Espinel-Rupérez; Maria Dolores Martín-Ríos; Veronica Salazar; Maria Rosario Baquero-Artigao; Gustavo Ortiz-Díez Journal: Vet Rec Open Date: 2019-10-05