Comparison of bidirectional barbed conventional monofilament suture material for closure of feline perineal urethrostomies.

OBJECTIVE

A retrospective comparison of bidirectional barbed absorbable suture material to conventional absorbable monofilament suture for closure of feline perineal urethrostomies.

ANIMALS

Client-owned cats (N = 26) that underwent perineal urethrostomy.

PROCEDURE

Medical records for cats that underwent perineal urethrostomy surgery at BluePearl Veterinary Specialty and Emergency Center Conshohocken between 2018 and 2021 were reviewed. Information regarding signalment, perioperative conditions, surgical procedures, treatments, and postoperative complications were identified. Long-term follow-up information was obtained using owner questionnaires and referring veterinarian records.

RESULTS

Mucocutaneous apposition in 15 cats was accomplished using bidirectional barbed suture material followed by 11 consecutive cats sutured using conventional suture material. The mean (± SD) surgery time in the bidirectional barbed group was 31.6 (± 5.8) minutes and in the conventional group was 34.5 (± 7.1) minutes. Short-term complications included urine extravasation, licking, hemorrhage, stranguria, bruising/erythema, diarrhea, and hemorrhage. The short-term complication rate in the bidirectional barbed group was 80% (12/15) compared to 55% (6/11) in the conventional group. Long-term complications included recurrent urinary tract infections, suture migration, recurrent feline lower urinary tract disease signs, excessive licking, and stricture. The long-term complication rate in the bidirectional barbed group was 47% (7/15) compared to 36% (4/11) in the conventional group.

CONCLUSION

The use of bidirectional barbed suture was comparable to the conventional absorbable suture technique with no significant differences in surgical time or complication rates.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of bidirectional barbed suture is an acceptable option for closure of perineal urethrostomies.