» Articles » PMID: 35345763

Augmentation Cystoplasty in Dogs: A Comparative Study of Different Tunica Vaginalis Grafts

Overview
Journal Vet Anim Sci
Date 2022 Mar 29
PMID 35345763
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In veterinary practice, numerous urological disorders that cause bladder dysfunction necessitate augmentation cystoplasty (AC). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dog tunica vaginalis allograft (DTVA), sheep tunica vaginalis xenograft (STVX) and sheep tunica vaginalis decellularized extracellular matrix (STVDEM) as graft materials for urinary bladder (UB) reconstruction following a 45±5% cystectomy model in dogs. In this study, 18 adult apparently healthy mongrel dogs of both sexes were divided into three groups (6 dogs each): the DTVA group, the STVX group, and the STVDEM group. The evaluation of the AC in different groups was carried out using clinical, hematological, serum biochemical, urine, ultrasonographic, retrograde positive cystogram, and histopathological analysis all over the study period of 12 weeks. The dogs in all groups survived the procedures, except three dogs died from both STVX and DTVA groups. The mean bladder capacity indicated that the DTVA and STVX groups had regained 82.22% and 68.62%, respectively, of their preoperative baseline capacity. Interestingly, the STVDEM group's bladder capacity increased to 113.70%. Although histological analysis revealed that the three grafts successfully rebuilt the bladder wall, the STVDEM demonstrated well-organized and well-differentiated epithelial and muscular tissues that resembled, but were not identical to, native UB tissues. As a result, STVDEM is proposed as an ideal and potential acellular graft for UB reconstruction in dogs, whereas DTVA and STVX could be employed in emergencies requiring UB reconstruction.

Citing Articles

Reconstruction of a partial esophageal defect using tunica vaginalis and buccal mucosa autograft: an experimental study in mongrel dogs.

Hashem M, Metwally E, Mahmoud Y, Helal I, Ahmed M J Vet Med Sci. 2023; 85(3):344-357.

PMID: 36709969 PMC: 10076192. DOI: 10.1292/jvms.22-0319.

References
1.
Close B, Banister K, Baumans V, Bernoth E, Bromage N, Bunyan J . Recommendations for euthanasia of experimental animals: Part 2. DGXT of the European Commission. Lab Anim. 1997; 31(1):1-32. DOI: 10.1258/002367797780600297. View

2.
Elbahnasy A, Shalhav A, Hoenig D, Figenshau R, Clayman R . Bladder wall substitution with synthetic and non-intestinal organic materials. J Urol. 1998; 159(3):628-37. View

3.
Estrada Mira S, Morales Castro C, Chams Anturi A, Arango Rave M, Restrepo Munera L . Use of the extracellular matrix from the porcine esophagus as a graft for bladder enlargement. J Pediatr Urol. 2019; 15(5):531-545. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.07.013. View

4.
Kropp B, Rippy M, Badylak S, Adams M, Keating M, Rink R . Regenerative urinary bladder augmentation using small intestinal submucosa: urodynamic and histopathologic assessment in long-term canine bladder augmentations. J Urol. 1996; 155(6):2098-104. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)66117-2. View

5.
Milovancev M, Scharf V, Townsend K, Singh A, Tremolada G, Worley D . Partial cystectomy with a bipolar sealing device in seven dogs with naturally occurring bladder tumors. Vet Surg. 2020; 49(4):794-799. DOI: 10.1111/vsu.13395. View