FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Vet Surg / Ex vivo evaluation of a novel suture loop method for equine ...
Veterinary surgery : VS2023; doi: 10.1111/vsu.13983

Ex vivo evaluation of a novel suture loop method for equine intestinal biopsies.

Abstract: To compare a novel suture loop method for intestinal biopsies (SLB) with a two-layer, hand-sutured biopsy (HSB) technique in equine small and large intestines. Methods: Experimental, randomized, ex vivo study. Methods: Eight healthy adult horses. Methods: The duodenum, aboral jejunum, and ventral and dorsal large colon were harvested after euthanasia and divided into three sections each. The sections were randomized to SLB, HSB, or control (C, no biopsy) groups. Tissue samples were excised after placement of a suture loop formed by a 4S Roeder knot and oversewn with a Cushing pattern using barbed suture (SLB), or a simple continuous pattern oversewn with a Cushing pattern (HSB). Intraluminal diameter was assessed with contrast radiographs; bursting pressure and wall tension were determined using a solid-state sensor after instillation of fluid. Tissue samples were evaluated by a board-certified pathologist. Results: Tissue samples were full thickness with similar depth and quality (p > .3). Changes in intraluminal diameter did not differ between methods (p > .16). The bursting pressures were higher for controls than biopsied sections (p < .009) but were not different between biopsy methods (p = .998). Bursting wall tension was higher for controls (p < .02) and was similar for both biopsy methods (p = .852). Conclusions: The SLB was equivalent to HSB in strength and effect on intraluminal diameter. The HSB samples were larger and more likely to contain mucosa/villi for histologic diagnosis. Conclusions: The SLB method can be adapted for laparoscopic surgery to obtain both small and large intestinal biopsies. Further investigation is needed before clinical use.
© 2023 The Authors. Veterinary Surgery published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-06-22 PubMed ID: 37345891DOI: 10.1111/vsu.13983Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research investigates the efficacy of a new suture loop method for collecting intestinal biopsies compared to a traditional way in horses. The results show that the two methods are comparably effective, suggesting the new technique could be adaptable for laparoscopic surgery but needs further investigation before practical use.

Methodology

  • Eight adult horses that were healthy were chosen for the study.
  • The gastrointestinal tracts of these horses were harvested after euthanasia and divided into three different sections: the duodenum, the aboral jejunum, and the ventral and dorsal of the large colon.
  • Each of these sections was then divided into three groups, one for the new suture loop biopsy (SLB) method, one for the traditional hand-sutured biopsy (HSB), and a control group where no biopsy was taken.
  • The SLB technique involved the use of a Roeder knot and an oversewn Cushing pattern using a barbed suture. The HSB used a simple continuous pattern, again oversewn with a Cushing pattern,

Technique Evaluation

  • The diameter inside the intestine was measured using contrast radiographs.
  • The pressure at which the intestinal wall would burst, and at what tension it was at before bursting, was measured by instilling fluid and then using a solid-state sensor.
  • Biopsied tissues were evaluated by a pathologist.

Findings

  • The tissue taken from both biopsy methods were full-depth and had a similar quality. The difference wasn’t statistically significant (p > .3).
  • Changes in intraluminal diameter showed no difference between the two methods (p > .16).
  • A significantly higher bursting pressure was found in the controls than the biopsied sections (p < .009), but the difference between the two biopsy methods was insignificant (p = .998).
  • Bursting wall tension was also higher for controls (p < .02), with no significant difference between the SLB and HSB methods (p = .852).

Conclusions

  • The new SLB technique was found to be as strong as the HSB technique and had a similar effect on the intraluminal diameter.
  • While HSB samples were larger and thus had a higher chance of containing mucosa/villi for histological diagnoses, the SLB method was effective as per the evaluated parameters.
  • The new SLB technique could be adapted for laparoscopic surgery for both small and large intestinal biopsies, but further research is necessary before it is ready for clinical use.

Cite This Article

APA
Munsterman AS, VanderBroek AR, Kottwitz JJ, Watson VE. (2023). Ex vivo evaluation of a novel suture loop method for equine intestinal biopsies. Vet Surg. https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.13983

Publication

Veterinary surgery : VS
ISSN: 1532-950X
NlmUniqueID: 8113214
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Munsterman, Amelia S
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
VanderBroek, Ashley R
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Kottwitz, Jack J
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
  • Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Watson, Victoria E
  • Department of Pathobiology and Diagnostic Investigation, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.

Grant Funding

  • 00525512 / American College of Veterinary Surgeons Foundation
  • RH082218 / Michigan State University College of Veterinary Medicine Endowed Research Fund

References

This article includes 36 references
  1. Scholes SF, Vaillant C, Peacock P, Edwards GB, Kelly DF. Diagnosis of grass sickness by ileal biopsy.. Vet Rec 1993;133:7-10.
  2. Schumacher J, Edwards JF, Cohen ND. Chronic idiopathic inflammatory bowel diseases of the horse.. J Vet Intern Med 2000;14:258-265.
  3. Fintl C, Lindberg R, McL Press C. Myenteric networks of interstitial cells of Cajal are reduced in horses with inflammatory bowel disease.. Equine Vet J 2019;52:298-304.
  4. Stewart HL, Engiles JB, Stefanovski D, Southwood L. Clinical and intestinal histologic features of horses treated for recurrent colic: 66 cases (2006-2015).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2018;252:1279-1288.
  5. Schramme M. Investigation and management of recurrent colic in the horse.. Equine Pract 1995;17:303-313.
  6. Prichard M, Ducharme NG, Wilkins PA, Erb HN, Butt M. Xanthine oxidase formation during experimental ischemia of the equine small intestine.. Can J Vet Res 1991;55:310-314.
  7. Little D, Tomlinson JE, Blikslager AT. Post operative neutrophilic inflammation in equine small intestine after manipulation and ischaemia.. Equine Vet J 2005;37:329-335.
  8. Koenig JB, Sawhney S, Cote N, LaMarre J. Effect of intraluminal distention or ischemic strangulation obstruction of the equine jejunum on jejunum motilin receptors and binding of erythromycin lactobionate.. Am J Vet Res 2006;67:815-820.
  9. Lindberg R, Nygren A, Persson SG. Rectal biopsy diagnosis in horses with clinical signs of intestinal disorders: a retrospective study of 116 cases.. Equine Vet J 1996 Jul;28(4):275-284.
  10. Siwińska N, Żak-Bochenek A, Paszkowska M, Karczewski M, Dlugopolska D, Haider W. Retrospective evaluation of the most frequently observed histological changes in duodenal and rectal mucosal biopsies in horses with recurrent colic.. Animals 2022;12(24):3527.
  11. Hostetter JM, Uzal FA. Gastrointestinal biopsy in the horse: overview of collection, interpretation, and applications.. J Vet Diagn Invest 2022;34(3):376-388.
  12. Coomer R, McKane S, Roberts V, Gorvy D, Mair T. Small intestinal biopsy and resection in standing sedated horses.. Equine Vet Educ 2016;28(11):636-640.
  13. Kobluk CN, Ducharme NG, Lumsden JH, Pascoe PJ, Livesey MA, Hurtig M, Horney FD, Arighi M. Factors affecting incisional complication rates associated with colic surgery in horses: 78 cases (1983-1985).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1989;195:639-642.
  14. Shearer TR, Holcombe SJ, Valberg SJ. Incisional infections associated with ventral midline celiotomy in horses.. J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2020;30(2):136-148.
  15. Schambourg MM, Marcoux M. Laparoscopic intestinal exploration and full-thickness intestinal biopsy in standing horses: a pilot study.. Vet Surg 2006;35(7):689-696.
  16. Bracamonte JL, Bouré LP, Geor RJ, Runciman JR, Nykamp SG, Cruz AM, Teeter MG, Waterfall HL. Evaluation of a laparoscopic technique for collection of serial full-thickness small intestinal biopsy specimens in standing sedated horses.. Am J Vet Res 2008;69(3):431-439.
  17. Mazziotti MV, Langer JC. Laparoscopic full-thickness intestinal biopsies in children.. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2001;33(1):54-57.
  18. MacHarg MA, Adams SB, Lamar CH, Becht JL. Electromyographic, myomechanical, and intraluminal pressure changes associated with acute extraluminal obstruction of the jejunum in conscious ponies.. Am J Vet Res 1986;47:7-11.
  19. King SK, Sutcliffe JR, Hutson JM. Laparoscopic seromuscular colonic biopsies: a surgeon's experience.. J Pediatr Surg 2005;40(2):381-384.
  20. Sahm M, Kube R, Schmidt S, Ritter C, Pross M, Lippert H. Current analysis of endoloops in appendiceal stump closure.. Surg Endosc 2011;25(1):124-129.
  21. Schier F, Hoffmann K, Waldschmidt J. Laparoscopic removal of Meckel's diverticula in children.. Eur J Pediatr Surg 1996;6(1):38-39.
  22. Freeman DE. Jejunum and Ileum.. In: Auer JA, Stick JA, eds. Equine Surgery. 5th ed. Elsevier; 2019:536-575.
  23. Gandini M, Bertuglia A. In vitro evaluation of an inverted end-to end equine jejunojejunal anastomosis using skin staples.. Vet Surg 2006;35:678-682.
  24. Nelson BB, Hassel DM. In vitro comparison of V-Loc™ versus Biosyn™ in a one-layer end-to-end anastomosis of equine jejunum.. Vet Surg 2014;43(1):80-84.
  25. Gandini M, Iotti BN, Giusto G. Biomechanical comparison of four techniques for pelvic flexure enterotomy closure in horses.. Vet Surg 2013;42(7):892-897.
  26. Sinovich M, Archer DC, Meunier NV, Kelly PG. Ex vivo comparison of barbed sutures for pelvic flexure enterotomy in horses.. Vet Surg 2020;49(3):487-495.
  27. Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW. NIH image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis.. Nat Methods 2012;9(7):671-675.
  28. Nieto JE, Dechant JE, Snyder JR. Comparison of one-layer (continuous Lembert) versus two-layer (simple continuous/Cushing) hand-sewn end-to-end anastomosis in equine jejunum.. Vet Surg 2006;35:669-673.
  29. Aldrich ED, Earnest J, Moorman VJ. Comparison of 3 suture closure techniques for pelvic flexure enterotomy in equine cadaveric large colon.. Vet Surg 2017;46:417-421.
  30. Allen D Jr, White NA 2nd, Tyler DE. Morphologic effects of experimental distention of equine small intestine.. Vet Surg 1988;17(1):10-14.
  31. Moore RM, Hance SR, Hardy J, Moore BR, Embertson RM, Constable PD. Colonic luminal pressure in horses with strangulating and nonstrangulating obstruction of the large colon.. Vet Surg 1996;25:134-141.
  32. Giusto G, Caramello V, Comino F, Gandini M. Ex vivo comparison of barbed and unbarbed sutures for closure of the caecal and pelvic flexure enterotomies in horses.. Vet Ital 2019;55(3):269-274.
  33. Christensen H, Langfelt S, Laurberg S. Bursting strength of experimental colonic anastomoses.. Eur Surg Res 1993;25:38-45.
  34. Nelsen T, Anders C. Dynamic aspects of small intestinal rupture with special consideration of anastomotic strength.. Arch Surg 1966;93:309-314.
  35. Sherlock C, Lee W, Mueller POE, Eggleston R, Epstein K. Ex vivo comparison on three hand sewn end-to-end anastomoses in normal equine jejunum.. Equine Vet J 2011;43(Suppl. 39):76-80.
  36. Hendriks T, Mastboom WJB. Healing of experimental anastomoses. Parameters of repair.. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:891-901.

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Verhaar N, Hammer E, Reineking W, Hewicker-Trautwein M, Geburek F. Ex vivo comparison of full-thickness biopsy techniques in the equine small intestine. Vet Surg 2025 Jan;54(1):208-218.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.14178pubmed: 39404177google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.