Comparison between single and three portal laparoscopic splenectomy in dogs
© Khalaj et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 9 September 2011
Accepted: 27 August 2012
Published: 10 September 2012
Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a newly growing technique to replace a more invasive conventional multiple portal laparoscopic surgery. The objective of this study was to compare single (SILS) with three portal (Conventional) laparoscopic splenectomy in dogs. Mongrel dogs (n = 18), weighting 15 ± 3 kg, were selected for this study (n = 12 SILS; n = 6 conventional). The area from xiphoid to pubis was prepared under aseptic conditions in dorsal recumbency with the head down and tilted 30 degree in the right lateral position. Pneumoperitoneum was established by CO2 using an automatic high flow pressure until achieving 12 mm Hg. Instrumentation used consisted of curved flexible-tip 5 mm Maryland forceps and ultracision harmonic scalpel for sealing and cutting of the vessels and splenic attachments.
All dogs recovered uneventfully. The splenectomy procedure using SILS and conventional methods were significantly different in the respective operative time (29.1 ± 1.65 vs. 42.0 + 2.69 min) and the length of the surgical scar (51.6 ± 1.34 mm vs. 72.0 ± 1.63 mm; P < 0.001). There were no post-operative wound complication including inflammation, infection, hernia formation and dehiscence up to one month after surgery. Meanwhile, the conversion to open surgery or application of additional portals was not required in both approaches.
This study demonstrated that SILS is a safe and feasible operation and could be used as an alternative approach to three portal (Conventional) for splenectomy in dog.
The application of laparoscopy, minimally invasive technique, along with its advantages and superiorities, has become an alternative approach to conventional surgery in small animal veterinary medicine [1–3]. Laparoscopy created huge changes in the field of surgery from large incisions in open surgeries to very small incisions. Within the context of laparoscopy, single incision laparoscopy is a newly growing technique to reduce the invasiveness of conventional multiple portal laparoscopic surgery. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) reduces surgical trauma and adhesion through implementing a small number and/or size of portals [4–6]. SILS is a feasible technique for different ablative and reconstructive procedures such as cholecystectomy, appendectomy and splenectomy in human [7–10].
Splenectomy in dog is a common operation for tumors . In human, hematological immune mediated diseases, non responsive to medical treatment, ITP and hemolytic anemia are the most common indications of splenectomy [12, 13]. The ideal indication for the laparoscopic splenectomy is an elective splenectomy in blood donor dogs to prevent transmission of hemobartonella infection . Clinical and experimental researches were conducted to elaborate laparoscopic and open splenectomy [14, 15] resulting in the recognition of laparoscopy as a gold standard procedure for splenectomy [16, 17]. In veterinary medicine, the feasibility of multiple portal laparoscopic splenectomy and its superiority over the conventional open technique was documented [11, 18]. Conventional laparoscopy performed safely in laboratory animals, porcine, caprine, canine and human [18–21]. The objective of this study was to compare single (SILS) with three portal (Conventional) laparoscopic splenectomy in dogs.
Clinical and operative findings following splenectomy by single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS; n = 10) and conventional (3 portals) laparoscopy (n = 6) in dogs
Operative time (min)
Scar length (mm)
29.1 ± 1.65a
51.6 ± 1.34a
28.9 ± 0.80a
10.1 ± 0.82a
275.4 ± 9.09a
42.0 ± 2.69b
72.0 ± 1.63b
31.2 ± 0.87a
9.3 ± 1.56a
288.3 ± 6.14a
The purpose of this study was to investigate the possibility of replacing SILS with conventional standard 3 portals laparoscopy for splenectomy in dog. Accordingly, the operative time and scar length were found to be significantly less in SILS compared to conventional method. Single portal position in SILS provided similar visualization, manipulation and exposure of splenic hilum as in conventional laparoscopy. Insertion of single umbilical portal reduced the chance of accidental injury to splenic parenchyma compared to inserting three separate portals in conventional method.
Recently, the application of SILS techniques has been described in many intra-abdominal procedures in human . The goal of single port access (SPA) surgery is to minimize the incision required to perform the procedure while maintaining the surgeon’s comfort . To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first report in using SILS for splenectomy in dog. In general, less morbidity, short length of hospital stay, less post operative pain and excellent cosmetic results were considered as advantages of SILS to the conventional multiple portals laparoscopic surgeries . Moreover, SILS splenectomy seems to be safe for intra operative visualization of the splenic hilum during transection of vessels and removal of spleen .
The operative time is an important parameter for surgical assessment. In the present study, the operative time was shorter in SILS (29.1 ± 1.65 min) than conventional method of laparoscopy (42.0 ± 2.69 min) for splenectomy in dog. Part of this difference might be due to the use of ultracision harmonic scalpel for sealing and cutting of the vessels and splenic attachments. Also, the experience of the surgeons has great impact on the outcome and operative time of this study. In one study on splenectomy using conventional laparoscopy in dog, the operative time was quite long in conventional three portals laparoscopy (115 ± 13.4 min) compared to open surgery (50.2 ± 6.6 min; 11). Apparently, experience of the surgeon could explain, in part, a long operative time. In other words, laparoscopic surgical times and complications tend to decrease with an increase in the level of the surgeon's experience, denominated learning curve [25–27].
The most time consuming part of the laparoscopic splenectomy is the time dedicated to remove spleen from the abdomen, which may be associated with the rupture of spleen. In the present study, 4 dogs (SILS: 3 dogs; Conventional: 1 dog) had slight and superficial rupture of spleen with negligible minor bleeding. This was managed successfully but elongated the surgical time.
The single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) could be an available, feasible and safe alternative to multiport laparoscopy for dogs undergoing elective splenectomy. It presented advantages in relation to operative time and surgical scar, without any particular complication. The use of the appropriate vessel sealer to ensure hemostasis would facilitate the procedure and decreases the operative time.
This study was approved by the ethical committee of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran (BNS717/25.07.2009). Mongrel dogs (n = 18), weighting 15 ± 3 kg, were collected from Dog’s Shelter House, Animal Welfare Society. Experimental dogs were kept in individual pens and received standard balanced diet throughout experiment. Dogs were returned to the Shelter House after experiment.
Following 8 hours food restriction, experimental dogs received acepromazine (0.1 mg/kg; IM) and buprenorphine (10 μg/kg; IV) for premedication and the combination of ketamine (5.5 mg/kg; IV) and diazepam (0.2 mg/kg; IV) for induction of anesthesia. The anesthesia was maintained by inhalation of isoflurane and oxygen through anesthetic machine. Cefazolin (22 mg/kg; IV) was administered as a preoperative prophylaxis at the time of inducing anesthesia.
Data were analyzed using Student t-test after examining the assumptions of parametric tests using SAS/STAT . Data were presented as Mean ± SE.
Authors wish to express their sincere appreciation to Dr Azin Tavakoli for some help during experiment, Research Council of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran, Center of Excellence for Veterinary Research on Indigenous Domestic Animals and Rasoul Akram Research Center of Laparoscopic Surgery for provision of financial assistance to complete this research.
- Schippers E, Tittel A, Ottinger A, Schumpelick V: Laparoscopy versus laparotomy: comparison of adhesion-formation after bowel resection in a canine model. Dig Surg. 1998, 15: 145-152. 10.1159/000018608.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gamal EM, Metzger P, Szabó G, Bráth E, Petõ K, Oláh A, Kiss J, Furka I, Mikó I: The influence of intraoperative complications on adhesion formation during laparoscopic and conventional cholecystectomy in an animal model. Surg Endosc. 2001, 15: 873-880. 10.1007/s004640000358.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Freeman LJ: Veterinary Endosurgery. 1999, Missouri: Mosby Co, 14-15. 1Google Scholar
- Gutt CN, Oniu T, Schemmer P, Mehrabi A, Büchler MW: Fewer adhesions induced by laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2004, 18: 898-906. 10.1007/s00464-003-9233-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Leggett PL, Churchman-Winn R, Miller G: Minimizing ports to improve laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2000, 14: 32-36. 10.1007/s004649900006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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. 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00601.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Desai MM, Berger AK, Brandina R, Aron M, Irwin BH, Canes D, Desai MR, Rao PP, Sotelo R, Stein R, Gill IS: Laparoscopic single site surgery: initial hundred patients. Urology. 2009, 74: 805-812. 10.1016/j.urology.2009.02.083.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Froghi F, Sodergren MH, Darzi AK, Paraskeva P: Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in general surgery: A review of current practice. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2010, 20: 191-204. 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181ed86c6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hansen EN, Munesterer OJ: Single incision laparoscopic splenectomy in a 5-year-old with hereditary spherocytosis. JSLS. 2010, 14: 286-288. 10.4293/108680810X12785289144809.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Targarona EM, Pallares JL, Balague C, Luppi CR, Marinello F, Hernández P, Martínez C, Trias M: Single incision approach for splenic diseases: a preliminary report on a series of 8 cases. Surg Endosc. 2010, 24: 2236-2240. 10.1007/s00464-010-0940-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stedile R, Beck CAC, Schichet F, Ferreira MP, Oliveria ST, Martens FB, Tessari JP, Bernades SBL, Oliveira CS, Santos AP, Mello FPS, Alievi MM, Muccillo MS: Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy in dogs. Pesquisa Vet Brasil. 2009, 29: 653-660. 10.1590/S0100-736X2009000800009.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chapman WHH, Albrecht RJ, Kim VB, Young JA, Chitwood WR: Computer-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy with the da Vinci Surgical Robot. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2002, 12: 155-159. 10.1089/10926420260188038.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Freeman LJ: Veterinary Endosurgery. Introduction to veterinary laparoscopy. 1999, Missouri: Mosby Co, 192-193. 1Google Scholar
- Aziz O, Athanasiou T, Tekkis PP, Purkayastha S, Haddow J, Malinovski V, Paraskeva P, Darzi A: Laparoscopic versus appendectomy in children: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2006, 243: 17-27. 10.1097/01.sla.0000193602.74417.14.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hutter MM, Randall S, Khuri SF, Henderson WG, Abbott WM, Warshaw AL: Laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass for morbid obesity: a multicenter, prospective, risk adjusted analysis for the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg. 2006, 243: 657-666. 10.1097/01.sla.0000216784.05951.0b.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rottman SJ, Podolsky ER, Kim E, Kem J, Curcillo PG: Single port access (SPA) spelenctomy. JSLS. 2010, 14: 48-52. 10.4293/108680810X12674612014509.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Targarona EM, Balague C, Martinez C, Pallares L, Estalella L, Trias M: Single port access: a feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopic splenectomy. Surg Innov. 2009, 16: 348-352. 10.1177/1553350609353765.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Park AE, Mckinlay R: Spleen. Schwartz's Principles of Surgery. Edited by: Brunicardi FC, Andersen DK, Billiar TR, Dunn DL, Hunter JG, Pollock RE. 2005, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1297-1315. 8Google Scholar
- Zhang JT, Wang HB, Liu YF, Sun YG, Shao JT, Shi J: Laparoscopic splenectomy in goats. Vet Surg. 2009, 38: 406-410. 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00507.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Collard F, Nadeau ME, Carmel EN: Laparoscopic splenectomy for treatment of splenic hemangiosarcoma in a dog. Vet Surg. 2010, 39: 870-872. 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00721.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Thibault C, Mamazza J, Létourneau R, Poulin E: Laparoscopic splenectomy: Operative technique and preliminary reports. Surg Endosc. 1992, 2: 248-253.Google Scholar
- Romanelli JR, Earle DB: Single-port laparoscopic surgery: an overview. Surg Endosc. 2009, 23: 1419-1427. 10.1007/s00464-009-0463-x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Froghi F, Sodergren MH, Darzi AK, Paraskeva P: Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in general surgery: A review of current practice. Surg Laparosc. 2010, 20: 191-204. 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181ed86c6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Targarona EM, Balagué C, Trias M: Is the laparoscopic approach reasonable in cases of splenomegaly?. Semin Laparosc Surg. 2004, 11: 185-190.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Higashihara E, Baba S, Nakagawa K, Murai M, Go H, Takeda M, Takahashi K, Suzuki K, Fujita K, Ono Y, Ohshima S, Matsuda T, Terachi T, Yoshida O: Learning curve and conversion to open surgery in cases of laparoscopic adrenalectomy and nephrectomy. J Urol. 1998, 159: 650-653. 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63693-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Harkki-Siren P, Sjberg J, Kurki T: Major complications of laparoscopy: A follow-up Finnish study. Obstet Gynecol. 1999, 94: 94-98. 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00566-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fraser SA, Feldman LS, Stanbridge D, Fried GM: Characterizing the learning curve for a basic laparoscopic drill. Surg Endosc. 2005, 19: 1572-1578. 10.1007/s00464-005-0150-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Statistical Analysis Systems (SAS): User’s Guide. 2005, Cary: SAS Institute, Inc, Version 9Google Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.