LAUSR

Abstract Background In this study, we compared two different techniques currently used for open canine ovariectomy: traditional method utilising absorbable suture and vessel sealing device (ENSEAL® Ethicon Endo‐Surgery, Cincinnati, OH). Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the surgical times, intraoperative nociceptive response and the frequency of intraoperative complications in the canine ovariectomy procedure using these two techniques. Methods Forty bitches were randomly divided into two groups. The Control Group (C) will use a classic open surgery approach using ligatures with absorbable suture and ovarian resection with a scalpel blade. In the Group E, resection of ovarian structures was performed with ENSEAL® tissue sealer device. For each dog the surgical times, the intraoperative nociceptive response (measuring heart rate, respiratory rate and non‐invasive blood pressure) and the intraoperative complications were measured to compare the effectiveness of the two techniques. Results The results of this study showed that the procedures performed using ENSEAL® were faster than the traditional techniques using surgical suture. Instead, the results regarding the nociception and the safety of the two procedures are similar. Conclusions The present study shows that the use of ENSEAL® significantly shortened the surgical time. Meanwhile, its use was found to be similarly safe and efficient in terms of intra‐operative nociception, as the classical techniques with absorbable suture. Canine ovariectomy using ENSEAL® device is more practical and faster than the traditional technique; the routine use of this device is considered a useful alternative for the canine neutering.