ArticleVeterinary research communications2026
Comparison of open ovariectomy with sutures or bipolar vessel sealing versus laparoscopic approach in cats.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare surgical time, incision length, intraoperative bleeding, and post-operative pain in cats undergoing three different ovariectomy techniques: open surgery with pedicle ligation using sutures, open surgery using a bipolar vessel-sealing device, and a two-port laparoscopic approach. A prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted on 27 healthy female cats assigned to three treatment groups (n = 9 per group). Surgical variables were recorded intraoperatively, and post-operative pain was assessed using a validated feline pain scale at hourly intervals over four hours. The laparoscopic group had the shortest incision length (mean 10.0 mm, SD 0.0) compared to the suture (mean 33.3 mm, SD 5.6) and bipolar device groups (mean 28.7 mm, SD 6.4). Surgical time was significantly shorter in the BVSD (27.0 ± 9.6 min) and LOVE groups (30.2 ± 5.2 min) compared with the Suture group (43.9 ± 14.4 min; one-way ANOVA, p = 0.005; Tukey post-hoc p < 0.05 vs. Suture for both comparisons). Post-operative pain scores at one hour (T1) were lower in the LOVE group (median 4 [IQR 3-5]) than in both open groups (Suture: 9 [IQR 8-9]; BVSD: 7 [IQR 6-8]; Kruskal-Wallis, p = 0.014; Dunn's post-hoc p < 0.05 vs. BVSD and trend towards lower scores vs. Suture). Only 1 of 9 cats requiring rescue analgesia versus 7 of 9 in each open group. The laparoscopic approach was associated with lower post-operative pain scores and a reduced need for rescue analgesia compared to open ovariectomy techniques, suggesting improved perioperative comfort. Although the laparoscopic group showed a significantly shorter surgical time compared with the suture group, this observation should be interpreted cautiously due to potential operator- and case-dependent variability. Nevertheless, laparoscopic ovariectomy in cats should be considered a promising and welfare-oriented technique that warrants further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.