Coelioscopic-assisted prefemoral ovariosalpingectomy in a d`Orbigny slider (Trachemys dorbigni) using a digital otoscope.

The purpose of this study was to assess the unilateral prefemoral coelioscopic-assisted approach for ovariosalpingectomy in a d`Orbigny slider (Trachemys dorbigni) using a digital otoscope. Twenty healthy turtles were randomly assigned to one of two groups, for right (GR; n=10) or left (GL; n=10) prefemoral access, for coelioscopic-assisted ovariosalpingectomy. Anesthesia and surgery times, body weight, and ovary/oviduct weight data were recorded. Anesthesia and surgery times did not differ significantly between the groups. Wound closure was the most time-consuming surgical step. Ovary and body weights significantly affected the exposure time of the ipsilateral and contralateral ovaries, respectively. Two intraoperative complications were reported. All the animals recovered uneventfully. The digital otoscope can be safely and effectively used for coelioscopic-assisted single-access, unilateral prefemoral ovariosalpingectomy in d`Orbigny slider.

Canine ovariectomy by hybrid or total natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: technical feasibility study and pain assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare technical feasibility, surgical time, surgical complications, and postoperative pain in ovariectomy (OVE) by hybrid and total natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trial. ANIMALS: Sixteen healthy and sexually intact bitches. METHODS: Dogs were randomly assigned to the hybrid NOTES group (HNG; n = 8) and the total NOTES group (TNG; n = 8) to compare surgical time, pain scores and complications. Pain was assessed by using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Melbourne pain scale (MPS). RESULTS: Surgical time did not differ between the experimental groups (HNG = 46.3 ± 18.5 minutes, TNG = 54.6 ± 31.1 minutes). Exteriorization of the ovaries through the vaginal wound was the major difficulty. Complications were minor in both groups and occurred intraoperatively only in the HNG, and in both groups post operatively. No dogs required rescue analgesia in the intraoperative or postoperative period. There were no differences in VAS or MPS scores between the groups for any surgical times except for the VAS assessment at 72 hours after extubation (HNG = 1.1 ± 0.3, TNG = 0.7 ± 0.4, P = .0221). CONCLUSION: Both NOTES techniques were comparable for canine OVE, with no requirement for additional analgesia in the postoperative periods. It was not possible to determine whether there was a clear advantage of one technique rather than the other. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The minimally invasive techniques proposed for laparoscopic OVE are feasible for dogs with low pain scores and low rates of complications for both groups.