» Articles » PMID: 22217028

Comparison of Surgical Site Infection Rates in Clean and Clean-contaminated Wounds in Dogs and Cats After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Surgery: 179 Cases (2007-2008)

Overview
Date 2012 Jan 6
PMID 22217028
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

Citing Articles

Optimized Two-Port Laparoscopic-Assisted Ovariohysterectomy for Hydrometra and Pyometra in Small-Sized Dogs.

Park Y, Minamoto T Animals (Basel). 2025; 15(2.

PMID: 39858187 PMC: 11758302. DOI: 10.3390/ani15020187.


Small animal patient preoperative preparation: a review of common antiseptics, comparison studies, and resistance.

Nye A, Thieman Mankin K Front Vet Sci. 2024; 11:1374826.

PMID: 38605919 PMC: 11007076. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1374826.


Surgical gowns as a safety barrier under non-standard environmental conditions.

Rondon E, Pirani O, SantAna De Camargo P, Leal C, Correa Filho R Braz J Microbiol. 2023; 54(4):3321-3325.

PMID: 37919460 PMC: 10689306. DOI: 10.1007/s42770-023-01162-4.


A Spanish Survey on the Perioperative Use of Antimicrobials in Small Animals.

Otero Balda I, Fuertes-Recuero M, Penelo Hidalgo S, Espinel Ruperez J, Lapostolle B, Ayllon-Santiago T Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(15).

PMID: 37570284 PMC: 10417378. DOI: 10.3390/ani13152475.


Laparoscopic partial pancreatectomy in a cat with exocrine pancreatic carcinoma.

Menard J, Buote N, Rivard B, Balkman C JFMS Open Rep. 2023; 9(1):20551169221149674.

PMID: 36777993 PMC: 9912550. DOI: 10.1177/20551169221149674.