The comparison of pericardiectomy and pericardiostomy methods in the treatment of heart diseases in dog

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare pericardiectomy and pericardiostomy methods to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of these different surgical approaches. Ten mixed-breed healthy male dogs were allocated into two groups; group 1 which underwent pericardiectomy and group 2 which underwent pericardiostomy. Under inhalation anesthesia, pericardiectomy was performed using median sternotomy. Pericardiostomy was undertaken after creating a 0.5-cm window on the pericardium. Another approach was from the left lateral thoracic wall between ribs four and six to allow passage of a Foley catheter which was fixed using a 5/0 nylon purse-string suture. An electrocardiograph (ECG) was performed on days 10, 20, and 30 post-surgery. Necropsy was performed on day 30, and tissue was taken for histological analysis. There were no significant differences in group 1 on day 30, but severe adhesions were seen in all of the five dogs in group 2 between the pericardium and thoracic wall. A thickened and dark pericardium was also seen. Myocardial hypertrophy was seen in group 2. No statistical differences were seen in the ECG values between the two groups. In both groups, normal myocardium, chronic inflammatory reaction, granulation tissue formation, infiltration inflammatory cells, and angiogenesis were seen. In conclusion, having performed both pericardiectomy and pericardiostomy via median sternotomy and left lateral approaches in dogs, only pericardiostomy led to severe adhesions at the anchoring site of the pericardium.