Comparison of patient outcomes following enterotomy versus intestinal resection and anastomosis for treatment of intestinal foreign bodies in dogs

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the relative risk of intestinal dehiscence in dogs undergoing intestinal resection and anastomosis (IRA), compared with enterotomy, for surgical management of small intestinal foreign bodies, and to evaluate the association between nasogastric tube placement for early enteral nutrition (EEN) and hospitalization time.

Animals: 211 dogs undergoing 227 surgeries for intestinal foreign body removal.

Procedures: Medical records were reviewed for dogs undergoing a single-site sutured enterotomy or IRA for foreign body intestinal obstruction between May 2008 and April 2018. Multivariable logistic regression was used to quantify the association between surgical procedure and dehiscence. Multiple linear regression was used to quantify the association of nasogastric tube placement with total hospitalization time.

Results: Dehiscence rates were 3.8% (7/183) and 18.2% (8/44) for enterotomy and IRA, respectively. Overall dehiscence rate for all surgeries was 6.6% (15/227). The odds of intestinal dehiscence for IRA were 6.09 times (95% CI, 1.89 to 19.58) the odds for enterotomy. An American Society of Anesthesiologists score > 3 (OR, 4.49; 95% CI, 1.43 to 14.11) and an older age (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.02] for each 1-month increase in age) were significantly associated with greater odds of intestinal dehiscence, regardless of surgical procedure. Placement of a nasogastric tube was not associated with intestinal dehiscence or decreased total hospitalization time when controlling for the year of surgery.

Conclusions and clinical relevance: Patients undergoing IRA were at a significantly higher risk of intestinal dehiscence, compared with patients undergoing enterotomy. Although this finding should not be used to recommend enterotomy over IRA, this information may be useful in guiding owner expectations and postoperative monitoring.