Advantages of laparoscopic-assisted ovariohysterectomy versus open ovariohysterectomy for dogs with pyometra not detected in randomized clinical trial.

Abstract

To compare results for surgery time, perioperative pain, need for rescue analgesia, variables, serum C-reactive protein concentration, and postoperative complications for dogs with pyometra treated with laparoscopic-assisted ovariohysterectomy (LaOVH) versus open-surgery (OS) ovariohysterectomy. 12 client-owned dogs with pyometra between June 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. Dogs enrolled in this prospective single-center randomized clinical trial had pyometra confirmed by history, physical examination, ultrasonography, and blood work and were randomly assigned to treatment group LaOVH or OS. Differences in results for variables of interest were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test, except the number of dogs requiring rescue analgesia was analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Values of P ≤ .05 were considered significant. 6 dogs were recruited in each group; results for 1 dog in the LaOVH group were excluded from further analysis due to free abdominal fluid detected during surgery. Median surgery time was significantly shorter and median total incision length was longer for the OS group (23 minutes; 106 mm), compared to the LaOVH group (37 minutes; 38 mm). No other results differed significantly between groups. Although fewer patients in the LaOVH group required rescue analgesia, this was not statistically significant. Therefore, our results could not prove previously suggested advantages of LaOVH (eg, less perioperative pain or faster recovery) in dogs with pyometra. Additionally, for the LaOVH group, the median surgical time was approximately 50% longer, an assistant was needed, and specialized equipment was required.