J Vet Sci.  2015 Dec;16(4):525-530. 10.4142/jvs.2015.16.4.525.

Laparoscopic ovariectomy in dogs: comparison between laparoendoscopic single-site and three-portal access

• Tapia-Araya AE
• Diaz-Guemes Martin-Portugues I
• Fresno Bermejo L
• Sanchez-Margallo FM

• KMID: 2133636
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2015.16.4.525

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and therapeutic safety of laparoendoscopic single-site ovariectomy (LESS-OVE) and 3-portal laparoscopic ovariectomy (Lap-OVE) in dogs. Ten female mixed breed dogs were included in the study. Dogs were divided into group 1 (LESS-OVE; n = 5) and group 2 (Lap-OVE; n = 5). All procedures were performed by laparoscopic-skilled surgeons, and the anesthetic protocol was the same for all patients. In both groups, the ovarian vascular pedicle and ligaments were transected using a bipolar vessel sealer/divider device. The mean total surgical time was slightly longer in LESS-OVE (36.6 +/- 3.5 min) than Lap-OVE (32.0 +/- 3.0 min); however, the differences were not significant. Perioperative complications were not reported in any group. Both laparoscopic techniques were shown to be equally feasible and safe for patients. However, surgeons found LESS-OVE to require more skill than Lap-OVE. Therefore, additional studies should be conducted to evaluate this novel approach in clinical veterinary practice, and a proper laparoscopic training program for veterinary surgeons should be developed.

Keyword

dogs; laparoendoscopic single-site; laparoscopy; minimally invasive surgery; ovariectomy

MeSH Terms

Animals
Dogs*
Education
Female
Humans
Laparoscopy
Ligaments
Operative Time
Ovariectomy*
Surgical Procedures, Minimally Invasive

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Insertion of the LESS Port under visual control.

• 

  Fig. 2 Exposure and coagulation of the ovarian pedicle area accomplished by traction of the proper ovarian ligament.

Reference

1. Austin B, Lanz OI, Hamilton SM, Broadstone RV, Martin RA. Laparoscopic ovariohysterectomy in nine dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 2003; 39:391–396.

2. Autorino R, Kim FJ, Rane A, De Sio M, Stein RJ, Damiano R, Micali S, Correia-Pinto J, Kaouk JH, Lima E. Low-cost reusable instrumentation for laparoendoscopic single-site nephrectomy: assessment in a porcine model. J Endourol. 2011; 25:419–424.

3. Behnia-Willison F, Foroughinia L, Sina M, McChesney P. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in gynaecology: feasibility and operative outcomes. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012; 52:366–370.

4. Bloomberg MS. Surgical neutering and nonsurgical alternatives. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1996; 208:517–519.

5. Bucher P, Pugin F, Morel P. From single-port access to laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:234–235.

6. Buote NJ, Kovak-McClaran JR, Schold JD. Conversion from diagnostic laparoscopy to laparotomy: risk factors and occurrence. Vet Surg. 2011; 40:106–114.

7. Case JB, Marvel SJ, Boscan P, Monnet EL. Surgical time and severity of postoperative pain in dogs undergoing laparoscopic ovariectomy with one, two, or three instrument cannulas. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2011; 239:203–208.

8. Curcillo PG 2nd, King SA, Podolsky ER, Rottman SJ. Single port access (SPA™) minimal access surgery through a single incision. Surg Technol Int. 2009; 18:19–25.

9. DeTora M, McCarthy RJ. Ovariohysterectomy versus ovariectomy for elective sterilization of female dogs and cats: is removal of the uterus necessary? J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2011; 239:1409–1412.

10. Devitt CM, Cox RE, Hailey JJ. Duration, complications, stress, and pain of open ovariohysterectomy versus a simple method of laparoscopic-assisted ovariohysterectomy in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005; 227:921–927.

11. Dunkin B, Adrales GL, Apelgren K, Mellinger JD. Surgical simulation: a current review. Surg Endosc. 2007; 21:357–366.

12. Dupré G, Fiorbianco V, Skalicky M, Gültiken N, Ay SS, Findik M. Laparoscopic ovariectomy in dogs: comparison between single portal and two-portal access. Vet Surg. 2009; 38:818–824.

13. Fiorbianco V, Skalicky M, Doerner J, Findik M, Dupré G. Right intercostal insertion of a veress needle for laparoscopy in dogs. Vet Surg. 2012; 41:367–373.

14. Fransson BA, Ragle CA. Assessment of laparoscopic skills before and after simulation training with a canine abdominal model. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2010; 236:1079–1084.

15. Gower S, Mayhew P. Canine laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted ovariohysterectomy and ovariectomy. Compend Contin Educ Vet. 2008; 30:430–432. 434436438440

16. Howe LM. Surgical methods of contraception and sterilization. Theriogenology. 2006; 66:500–509.

17. Kim YK, Lee SY, Park SJ, Lee SS, Lee HC, Lee HJ, Yeon SC. Feasibility of single-portal access laparoscopic ovariectomy in 17 cats. Vet Rec. 2011; 169:179.

18. Lansdowne JL, Mehler SJ, Bouré LP. Minimally invasive abdominal and thoracic surgery: principles and instrumentation. Compend Contin Educ Vet. 2012; 34:E1.

19. Lansdowne JL, Mehler SJ, Bouré LP. Minimally invasive abdominal and thoracic surgery: principles and instrumentation. Compend Contin Educ Vet. 2012; 34:E2.

20. Lekawa M, Shapiro SJ, Gordon LA, Rothbart J, Hiatt JR. The laparoscopic learning curve. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1995; 5:455–458.

21. Manassero M, Leperlier D, Vallefuoco R, Viateau V. Laparoscopic ovariectomy in dogs using a single-port multiple-access device. Vet Rec. 2012; 171:69.

22. Matyjasik H, Adamiak Z, Pesta W, Zhalniarovich Y. Laparoscopic procedures in dogs and cats. Pol J Vet Sci. 2011; 14:305–316.

23. Mayhew P. Developing minimally invasive surgery in companion animals. Vet Rec. 2011; 169:177–178.

24. Mayhew PD. Complications of minimally invasive surgery in companion animals. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2011; 41:1007–1021.

25. Mayhew PD, Brown DC. Comparison of three techniques for ovarian pedicle hemostasis during laparoscopic-assisted ovariohysterectomy. Vet Surg. 2007; 36:541–547.

26. McClaran JK, Buote NJ. Complications and need for conversion to laparotomy in small animals. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2009; 39:941–951.

27. Okkens AC, Kooistra HS, Nickel RF. Comparison of long-term effects of ovariectomy versus ovariohysterectomy in bitches. J Reprod Fertil Suppl. 1997; 51:227–231.

28. Pérez-Duarte FJ, Lucas-Hernández M, Matos-Azevedo A, Sánchez-Margallo JA, Díaz-Güemes I, Sánchez-Margallo FM. Objective analysis of surgeons' ergonomy during laparoendoscopic single-site surgery through the use of surface electromyography and a motion capture data glove. Surg Endosc. 2014; 28:1314–1320.

29. Rao PP, Rao PP, Bhagwat S. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery - current status and controversies. J Minim Access Surg. 2011; 7:6–16.

30. Runge J. The cutting edge: introducing reduced port laparoscopic surgery. Today Vet Pract. 2012; Jan/Feb:14–20.

31. Runge JJ, Curcillo PG 2nd, King SA, Podolsky ER, Holt DE, Davidson J, Agnello KA. Initial application of reduced port surgery using the single port access technique for laparoscopic canine ovariectomy. Vet Surg. 2012; 41:803–806.

32. Sanchez-Salas RE, Barret E, Watson J, Stakhovskyi O, Cathelineau X, Rozet F, Galiano M, Rane A, Desai MM, Sotelo R, Vallancien G. Current status of natural orifice trans-endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and laparoendoscopic single site surgery (LESS) in urologic surgery. Int Braz J Urol. 2010; 36:385–400.

33. Usón-Gargallo J, Tapia-Araya AE, Díaz-Güemes Martin-Portugués I, Sánchez-Margallo FM. Development and evaluation of a canine laparoscopic simulator for veterinary clinical training. J Vet Med Educ. 2014; 41:218–224.

34. Van Goethem B, Schaefers-Okkens A, Kirpensteijn J. Making a rational choice between ovariectomy and ovariohysterectomy in the dog: a discussion of the benefits of either technique. Vet Surg. 2006; 35:136–143.

35. Van Goethem BE, Rosenveldt KW, Kirpensteijn J. Monopolar versus bipolar electrocoagulation in canine laparoscopic ovariectomy: a nonrandomized, prospective, clinical trial. Vet Surg. 2003; 32:464–470.

36. Wildt DE, Lawler DF. Laparoscopic sterilization of the bitch and queen by uterine horn occlusion. Am J Vet Res. 1985; 46:864–869.