title: Comparison of the effects of the CO2 surgical laser and conventional surgical techniques on healing and wound tensile strength of skin flaps in the dog.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine if CO(2) laser was superior to conventional surgical techniques (CST) for creation of skin flaps in dogs as determined by hemostasis, wound healing, and wound tensile strength.
  
  
  METHODS
  In-vivo model
  
  
  METHODS
  Six large, mixed-breed dogs.
  
  
  METHODS
  On each dog's trunk, 3 pairs of identical, dorsally based, pedicled skin flaps were created and sutured back into position. Based on a Latin Square design, flaps on one side were created with a CO(2) laser and on the other side by CST. Intraoperative hemorrhage was measured by weighing sponges used to absorb blood. On days 7, 10, and 14, specimens from the flap-skin junction and the central portion of each pair of flaps were collected. Specimens were subjected to tensile strength testing and histologic examination to evaluate wound healing.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Mean (+/- standard error of mean [SEM]) hemorrhage was significantly less (P =.02) with CO(2) laser (4.70 +/- 1.37 g) than CST (10.82 +/- 1.37 g). Wound tensile strength (N/m(2)) after CST (0.49 +/- 0.049) was significantly greater (P =.01) than with CO(2) laser (0.17 +/- 0.049). Laser incisions had partial necrosis of the wound edges and a more extensive inflammatory response; however, healing of the wound beds were similar regardless of technique.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The CO(2) laser provided better intraoperative hemostasis than CST. However, overall healing and increase in tensile strength of the skin-flap junction of the flaps created by the laser may be delayed during the first few weeks of wound healing.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Skin flaps used to repair large skin defects in dogs can be created and elevated with a CO(2) laser. In areas of increased skin mobility or tension, skin flaps created with CO(2) laser may be more susceptible to complications such as dehiscence, and care should be taken to minimize these complications.
authors.affiliation: Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University College of Veterinary Medicine, East Lansing, USA.
authors.forename: Michael B
authors.initials: MB
authors.lastname: Mison
authors.forename: Barbara
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Steficek
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lavagnino
authors.forename: Brian D
authors.initials: BD
authors.lastname: Teunissen
authors.forename: Joe G
authors.initials: JG
authors.lastname: Hauptman
authors.forename: Richard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Walshaw
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D016063:Blood Loss, Surgical; D002245:Carbon Dioxide; D062109:Dermatologic Surgical Procedures; D004285:Dogs / Q000601:surgery*; D053685:Laser Therapy / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D013524:Surgical Flaps / Q000662:veterinary*; D013718:Tensile Strength; D014945:Wound Healing
chemical_list: D002245:Carbon Dioxide