Laparotomy-Assisted Transoral Foreign Body Retrieval in Small Animals: 10 Cases (2018-2020)

Power, Ashley M.; Diamond, David W.; Puetthoff, Carolin

doi:10.1016/j.tcam.2020.100504

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When LAEA was successful in our study, the postoperative complication rate (8%) was similar to most complication rates reported in the literature, ranging from 0% to 18% (Hayes 2009, Otomo et al 2019, Maxwell et al 2020. No complications were reported after laparotomy-assisted transoral FB retrieval using a grasping instrument, but there was no follow-up or endoscopic evaluation of the oesophagus and stomach (Power et al 2021). All postoperative complications that occurred in our study were minor, contrary to what was described in the literature for FB removal by intestinal incision, where some major complications were also described (Hobday et al 2014, Maxwell et al 2020.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

“…Another recent report discusses manoeuvring the intestinal FB in the stomach, but removal was performed using a grasping instrument introduced via an orogastric tube without endoscopy (Power et al . 2021). Manoeuvring the FB into the colon during laparotomy was also cited (Maxwell et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No complications were reported after laparotomy‐assisted transoral FB retrieval using a grasping instrument, but there was no follow‐up or endoscopic evaluation of the oesophagus and stomach (Power et al . 2021). All postoperative complications that occurred in our study were minor, contrary to what was described in the literature for FB removal by intestinal incision, where some major complications were also described (Hobday et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One report discusses manoeuvring the intestinal FB in the stomach to avoid enterotomy, but removal was performed via gastrotomy and not endoscopy (Barry 2016). Another recent report discusses manoeuvring the intestinal FB in the stomach, but removal was performed using a grasping instrument introduced via an orogastric tube without endoscopy (Power et al 2021). Manoeuvring the FB into the colon during laparotomy was also cited (Maxwell et al 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Surgical removal of intestinal foreign bodies using a laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic approach in dogs and cats and comparison with enterotomy

Demars

Boland²,

Minier

2022

J of Small Animal Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To describe a novel surgical technique for intestinal foreign body removal without enterotomy using a laparotomy-assisted endoscopic approach and compare short-term outcomes to enterotomy.Materials and MethOds: Medical records of dogs and cats with intestinal foreign bodies that underwent attempted treatment with a laparotomy-assisted endoscopic approach between June 2019 and July 2021 were extracted. The approach consisted in manoeuvring the intestinal foreign body into the stomach during laparotomy and then removing it via a gastroscopy. If the foreign body was unmovable, an enterotomy was performed.results: Fifty-eight cases were enrolled and foreign bodies were successfully removed in 25 cases using a laparotomy-assisted endoscopic approach. The median distance between the pylorus and the proximal part of the foreign body was 55 cm (range: 0 to 300). The mean surgical time and median endoscopic time were 49 minutes (±sd 12.8) and 5 minutes (range: 2 to 28), respectively. All but two cases were discharged 1 day postoperatively. In 20 cases, the foreign body was not easily movable, and an enterotomy was performed. In three of these cases, conversion to enterotomy was required due to serosal tears that occurred as a consequence of the attempted retrograde manipulation of the foreign body. Foreign body width, length and distance to pylorus were not significantly different between the two techniques.Mean surgical time was significantly shorter for laparotomy-assisted endoscopic approach compared to enterotomy: 49 minutes (±SD 12.8) versus 61.7 minutes (±SD 14.6). clinical significance: Surgical removal of intestinal foreign bodies through a laparotomy-assisted endoscopic approach is a feasible technique that offers satisfactory outcomes and shorter surgical time than enterotomy. Retrograde manipulation of the intestinal foreign body may result in serosal tears.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Surgical removal of intestinal foreign bodies using a laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic approach in dogs and cats and comparison with enterotomy

Demars

Boland²,

Minier

2022

J of Small Animal Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The process of breaking down complex nutrients in the feed into simple ones, accessible for absorption by the animal's body, is referred to as digestion. A.M. Power et al (2021) note that the digestive tract of small domestic animals, specifically dogs and cats, includes all organs involved in the intake and processing of food. The digestive system can be conventionally divided into three sections.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and diagnostic methods of surgical pathology in the digestive system of animals

Maliuk,

Tul,

Kulida

et al. 2024

Ukrainian journal of veterinary sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relevance of the study is driven by the rapid increase in the number of small domestic animals with surgical pathology of the digestive system, requiring effective diagnosis and surgical intervention. In this regard, the purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of various diseases of the digestive organs in small domestic animals and to determine the most informative methods of their diagnosis. The primary approach in the study is to compare the informativeness of results obtained from examining sick animals, including general (history collection, examination, palpation) and special (ultrasound diagnostics of abdominal organs, endoscopy of the digestive tract, radiography) diagnostic methods. The advantages and disadvantages of different special diagnostic methods were identified and analysed, providing a comprehensive assessment of indications and contraindications for their application in clinical veterinary practice. Out of 1863 animals that presented to the veterinary clinic, pathologies of the digestive tract of various origins were diagnosed in 957 animals. Conservative care was provided to 79.7% of the affected animals (763 individuals). Complicated pathologies requiring surgical treatment were diagnosed in 194 (20.3%) animals. Among these, 170 (17.7%) had foreign bodies in the stomach, 14 (1.5%) had gastric erosions, 4 (0.4%) had neoplasms, 3 (0.3%) had perforations, and 3 (0.3%) had inflammatory diseases. The use of ultrasound diagnostics allowed for the detection of linear foreign bodies in the stomach and the identification of associated complications such as stomach or intestinal perforations caused by foreign bodies. Radiographic examination proved effective when radiopaque structures (metals, stones, bones) were present as foreign bodies. The materials of the study provide practical value for both researchers and practising veterinarians, offering the opportunity to utilise new instrumental diagnostic methods to assess the feasibility of surgical manipulations on the stomach and intestines in dogs and cats

show abstract

Laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal foreign bodies: Evaluation of this technique and postoperative recovery in dogs and cats

Cola,

Ferrari,

Del Magno

et al. 2024

Veterinary Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo compare the outcome of the laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal (LAER) of gastrointestinal foreign bodies (FBs) with traditional enterotomy, and to determine which factors affected the ability to remove FBs.Study designRetrospective observational study.Sample populationDogs and cats (n = 81) with gastrointestinal FBs.MethodsDogs and cats were divided into Group 1 (LAER, n = 40) and Group 2 (Enterotomy, n = 41). The localization and characteristics of the FBs (sharp or blunt; discrete or linear; single or multiple) were evaluated statistically to identify the factors that affected the ability of LAER to remove, partially or completely, the FBs (χ2 test). The length of the postoperative stay, postoperative analgesia, and resumption of spontaneous feeding were compared between groups (Mann–Whitney U‐test). Short‐term follow up (14 days) was recorded.ResultsLaparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal allowed complete or partial removal of FBs in 35/40 dogs and cats, regardless of the characteristics or the localization of the FBs. The presence of intestinal wall damage (p = .043) was associated with the conversion to an enterotomy. Group 1 required a shorter postoperative hospital stay (p = .006), less need for analgesia (p < .001), and experienced a faster resumption of spontaneous feeding (p = .012), and similar complication rate to Group 2.ConclusionLaparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal resulted in a faster postoperative recovery when compared with an enterotomy. The FBs’ characteristics or localization did not affect the efficacy of the technique to remove FBs.Clinical significanceLaparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal allows the removal of a variety of FBs, avoiding intestinal incision and resulting in a fast postoperative recovery.

show abstract

Laparotomy-Assisted Transoral Foreign Body Retrieval in Small Animals: 10 Cases (2018-2020)

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Surgical removal of intestinal foreign bodies using a laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic approach in dogs and cats and comparison with enterotomy

Surgical removal of intestinal foreign bodies using a laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic approach in dogs and cats and comparison with enterotomy

Prevalence and diagnostic methods of surgical pathology in the digestive system of animals

Laparotomy‐assisted endoscopic removal of gastrointestinal foreign bodies: Evaluation of this technique and postoperative recovery in dogs and cats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About