Gastrointestinal thickness, duration, and leak pressure of five intestinal anastomosis techniques in cats

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo compare time to construct completion and resistance to leakage for five intestinal anastomosis techniques in cats and to report normal feline gastrointestinal thickness.Study designExperimental study.Sample populationGrossly normal intestinal segments (n = 120) from 10 fresh cat cadavers.MethodsA total of 8 cm segments of fresh feline cadaveric intestine were collected, and mural thickness was recorded. Segments were randomly allocated between a control group (n = 20 segments) and five treatment groups (20 segments/group with 2 segments/construct = 10 constructs per group): (1) hand‐sewn anastomosis – simple interrupted (HSA‐SI), (2) hand‐sewn anastomosis – simple continuous (HSA‐SC), (3) functional end‐to‐end stapled anastomosis (FEESA), (4) functional end‐to‐end stapled anastomosis with oversew (FEESA‐O), (5) skin stapled anastomosis (SS). Time to construct completion, leakage location, initial leak pressure (ILP), and maximum intraluminal pressure (MIP) were compared.ResultsMean mural thickness ± SD (mm) for the stomach, duodenum, jejunum, and ileum were 1.66 ± 0.28, 2.05 ± 0.18, 2.28 ± 0.30, and 2.11 ± 0.39, respectively. ILPs (mean ± SD) for HSA‐SI (165 ± 122 mmHg), HSA‐SC (149 ± 83), FEESA‐O (63 ± 25, FEESA (84 ± 59), SS (77 ± 56), and control segments (>500) were compared. There was no statistically significant difference in ILP (p > .08) or MIP (p > .084) between any treatment groups. Nonoversewn FEESAs were 2.4 times faster to perform compared to oversewn FEESA and SS groups, and 4.7 times faster than HSA (p < .001).ConclusionAll anastomosis techniques provide resistance to leakage that is supraphysiological to that of the normal maximum intraluminal pressure. HSA take longer to complete than stapled anastomoses.Clinical significanceAll anastomotic techniques may be appropriate in cats. Hand‐sewn anastomoses result in a longer surgical time.