Journal of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회지)

The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Continuous Appositional Suture Patterns for Cystotomy Closure in Ex Vivo Swine Model

  • Sang-hun, Park (College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeju National University) ;
  • Joo-Myoung, Lee (College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeju National University) ;
  • Hyunjung, Park (College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeju National University) ;
  • Jongtae, Cheong (College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeju National University)
  • Received : 2022.11.07
  • Accepted : 2022.12.28
  • Published : 2022.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Several suture patterns can be used for cystotomy closure, and a continuous suture pattern is the most commonly used. In this study, the fluid-tight ability and other suitabilities of continuous appositional sutures, such as the simple continuous suture pattern (SC), running suture pattern (RN), and Ford interlocking suture pattern (FI), were compared for cystotomy closure. Cystotomy closure was performed using each suture method in 10 cases of ex vivo swine bladders in each group. Suture time, leakage site, suture length, bursting pressure (BP), bursting volume (BV), and circular bursting wall tension (CBWT) were measured. Suture time and suture length were the shortest in RN and the longest in FI. Leakage occurred in two places: the incision line directly and the hole made by the suture. Leakage occurred through the incision line in 4 bladders of the RN group and 2 bladders of the FI group, but not in the SC group, and in the rest of the bladders, leakage occurred through the suture hole. The values of BP, BV, and CBWT increased in the order of FI, SC, and RN. Suture time and suture length can be considered as factors related to healing and side effects. In this study, leakage through the incision was found in a less appositional area; therefore, leakage through the hole could be considered an indicator of better apposition. Good apposition is one of the conditions required for ideal cystotomy closure. The bursting strength representing the fluid-tight ability can be expressed as the CBWT. RN is expected to be efficient and cause a small degree of foreign body reaction; however, it is expected to be less stable. FI has the greatest fluid-tightness ability, but it has been proposed that side effects due to foreign body reactions most frequently occur in FI. In conclusion, SC, which is expected to have a sufficient degree of fluid-tightness and appropriate recovery, is preferable to other continuous appositional suturing methods for cystotomy closure.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the 2022 education, research and student guidance grant funded by Jeju National University.

References

  1. Adams H, Barnes R, Small C, Hadley H. Sutures and bladder wound healing in the experimental animal. Invest Urol 1975; 12: 267-268. 
  2. Al-Asadi RN, Khwaf NB. A comparative study between inverting and appositional suture patterns for cystotomy closure in dog. Iraqi J Vet Med 2014; 38: 40-47.  https://doi.org/10.30539/iraqijvm.v38i1.254
  3. Brown DC, Conzemius MG, Shofer F, Swann H. Epidemiologic evaluation of postoperative wound infections in dogs and cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997; 210: 1302-1306. 
  4. Burrow R, Batchelor D, Cripps P. Complications observed during and after ovariohysterectomy of 142 bitches at a veterinary teaching hospital. Vet Rec 2005; 157: 829-833.  https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.157.26.829
  5. Cornell KK. Cystotomy, partial cystectomy, and tube cystostomy. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 2000; 15: 11-16.  https://doi.org/10.1053/svms.2000.7300
  6. Cruse PJ, Foord R. The epidemiology of wound infection. A 10-year prospective study of 62,939 wounds. Surg Clin North Am 1980; 60: 27-40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0039-6109(16)42031-1
  7. Gozen AS, Arslan M, Schulze M, Rassweiler J. Comparison of laparoscopic closure of the bladder with barbed polyglyconate versus polyglactin suture material in the pig bladder model: an experimental in vitro study. J Endourol 2012; 26: 732-736.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0194
  8. Henderson RA. Controlling peritoneal adhesions. Vet Surg 1982; 11: 30-33.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1982.tb00662.x
  9. Hildreth BE 3rd, Ellison GW, Roberts JF, Adin CA, Holloway TJ, Archer LL, et al. Biomechanical and histologic comparison of single-layer continuous Cushing and simple continuous appositional cystotomy closure by use of poliglecaprone 25 in rats with experimentally induced inflammation of the urinary bladder. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 686-692.  https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.67.4.686
  10. Hill WG. Control of urinary drainage and voiding. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2015; 10: 480-492.  https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.04520413
  11. Jiborn H, Ahonen J, Zederfeldt B. Healing of experimental colonic anastomoses. I. Bursting strength of the colon after left colon resection and anastomosis. Am J Surg 1978; 136: 587-594.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9610(78)90315-X
  12. Khan IU, Khan MA, Chaudhary AS, Ali MM, Imran M, Ijaz M, et al. Evaluation of different suturing techniques for cystotomy closure in canines. JAPS 2013; 23: 981-985. 
  13. Kieves NR, Krebs AI. Comparison of leak pressures for single-layer simple continuous suture pattern for cystotomy closure using barbed and monofilament suture material in an ex vivo canine model. Vet Surg 2017; 46: 412-416.  https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.12632
  14. Kirby BM. Peritoneum and retroperitoneum. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, editors. Veterinary surgery: small animal expert consult. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2017: 1608-1610. 
  15. Knecht CD, Allen AR, Williams DJ, Johnson JH. Suture patterns. In: Knecht CD, Allen AR, Williams DJ, Johnson JH, editors. Fundamental techniques in veterinary surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders. 1981: 52-68. 
  16. Lipscomb VJ. Bladder. In: Johnston SA, Tobias KM, editors. Veterinary surgery: small animal expert consult. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2017: 2220-2225. 
  17. MacPhail C, Fossum TW. Biomaterial, suturing and hemostasis. In: Fossum TW, editor. Small animal surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, Inc. 2019: 68-70. 
  18. McLoughlin M, Scansen B. The urinary tract. In: Williams JM, Niles JD, editors. BSAVA manual of canine and feline abdominal surgery. 2nd ed. Gloucester: British Small Animal Veterinary Association. 2015: 269-271. 
  19. Nelsen TS, Anders CJ. Dynamic aspects of small intestinal rupture with special consideration of anastomotic strength. Arch Surg 1966; 93: 309-314.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.1966.01330020101016
  20. Petty RE, Johnston W, McCormick AQ, Hunt DW, Rootman J, Rollins DF. Uveitis and arthritis induced by adjuvant: clinical, immunologic and histologic characteristics. J Rheumatol 1989; 16: 499-505. 
  21. Phe V, Chartier-Kastler E, Soler JM, Denys P. Pathophysiology of the low-compliant bladder. In: Ginsberg D, Karsenty G, Corcos J, editors. Textbook of the neurogenic bladder. 3rd ed. Florida: CRC Press. 2015: 125-132. 
  22. Radasch RM. An evaluation of appositional versus inverting suture patterns for cystotomy closure. Ames: Iowa State University; 1988. [thesis]. 
  23. Radasch RM, Merkley DF, Wilson JW, Barstad RD. Cystotomy closure. A comparison of the strength of appositional and inverting suture patterns. Vet Surg 1990; 19: 283-288.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1990.tb01187.x
  24. Stone EA, Kyles AF. Cystotomy and partial cystectomy. Bojrab MJ, Waldron DR, Toombs JP, editors. Current techniques in small animal surgery. 5th ed. Wyoming: Tenton NewMedia. 2014: 481-482. 
  25. Thieman-Mankin KM, Ellison GW, Jeyapaul CJ, Glotfelty-Ortiz CS. Comparison of short-term complication rates between dogs and cats undergoing appositional single-layer or inverting double-layer cystotomy closure: 144 cases (1993-2010). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2012; 240: 65-68.  https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.240.1.65
  26. Willard MD, Schulz KS, Fossum TW. Surgical infections and antibiotic selection. In: Fossum TW, editor. Small animal surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, Inc. 2019: 79-89.