Spaying

[Amory]

Does anyone know of a vet that uses minimally invasive surgery or "laser" for the spaying procedure. I know it is, of course, less invasive for your pet and requires less recovery time. So far the only one I've found is in Gainesville, just a bit far!

[Mrs. Robinson]

Does anyone know of a vet that uses minimally invasive surgery or "laser" for the spaying procedure. I know it is, of course, less invasive for your pet and requires less recovery time. So far the only one I've found is in Gainesville, just a bit far!

I have never heard of using laser as a spaying technique, but I guess it exists.

Less invasive? Then that means things are still left inside your pet. Just like with a human, it's best to have everything removed so you don't have any future issues or surgeries.

When you speak of recovery time . . . Spaying a pet is not like a woman having a hysterectomy.
Your pet will not moan and groan and beg you not to have to use the vacuum or stand there doing the dishes!
A day later you will be hard pressed to even know your baby was spayed.
Of course, you should limit strenuous exercise or rough playing, but the surgery is an every day occurrence in the life of a vet.

[Amory]

Thanks for the reply. I guess you are not familiar with minimally invasive surgery commonly called laproscopic surgery. It is used on humans for many surgeries and now animals as well if the vet has an advanced surgery unit. I can assure you things are not left inside your pet that should be removed. I have had many pets spayed before with no real issues but I am in favor of any surgery that is better for the health and comfort of your pet. Look it up. You might just learn something new!

[Mrs. Robinson]

Thanks for the reply. I guess you are not familiar with minimally invasive surgery commonly called laproscopic surgery. It is used on humans for many surgeries and now animals as well if the vet has an advanced surgery unit. I can assure you things are not left inside your pet that should be removed. I have had many pets spayed before with no real issues but I am in favor of any surgery that is better for the health and comfort of your pet. Look it up. You might just learn something new!

I am very familiar with laparoscopic surgery; it's not new and has been around for a long time.
However, that is not what I responded to.
My comment was regarding a typical spay on a pet dog or cat.

In a laparoscoptic spay, all the reproductive organs are not removed.
Only the ovaries are taken out, so your assurance that "everything" is removed is incorrect.
Why would you want to leave a reproductive organ inside your pet when it no longer has any use?
She very well could require additional surgery down the road to remove the uterus.

At a personal level, I opt for a typical total spay surgery.
A laparascoptic spay is not better for the health of your pet.
All my dogs and cats have survived their traditional spay surgery and they are all happy campers.

[Amory]

I am not here to debate the issue with you. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion. I however will rely on the opinion of experts in the field as evidenced by the many articles you will find by experts if you look up laparoscopic neutering. UF is one of those many experts and I would hope as they educate many of our future veterinarians they know what they are talking about. My dogs and cats have survived traditional spaying and neutering as well but I am all for progress. Time marches on. Don't blink. Enough said - let's move on.

[Mrs. Robinson]

I am not here to debate the issue with you. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion. I however will rely on the opinion of experts in the field as evidenced by the many articles you will find by experts if you look up laparoscopic neutering. UF is one of those many experts and I would hope as they educate many of our future veterinarians they know what they are talking about. My dogs and cats have survived traditional spaying and neutering as well but I am all for progress. Time marches on. Don't blink. Enough said - let's move on.

No debate on my part. And you are entitled to your opinion. I simply weigh the facts.

However, you didn't answer the question as to why you would choose to leave an unproductive organ (the uterus) inside your pet knowing laparascoptic surgery isn't able to complete the job? In my mind this is an important factor.

You are relying on the opinion of so-called experts who perform that type of surgery. There are many young veterinarians in this area -- many. They certainly have been trained in this. Why aren't they performing this type of surgery?

[Boomer]

Thanks for the reply. I guess you are not familiar with minimally invasive surgery commonly called laproscopic surgery. It is used on humans for many surgeries and now animals as well if the vet has an advanced surgery unit. I can assure you things are not left inside your pet that should be removed. I have had many pets spayed before with no real issues but I am in favor of any surgery that is better for the health and comfort of your pet. Look it up. You might just learn something new!



I am not at all familiar with any kind of spaying other than the method that has been around forever.

But I am familiar with pyometra in dogs.......

I had never heard of this potentially deadly uterine infection until a sweet little dog I know gave everybody a big scare. She was 10 pounds and 14 years old and had never been spayed because her owner was all about natural ways.....

Everything turned out OK. Warning signs were caught very early and the little dog is still with her family, after having a very late-in-life spaying.

If you choose to read more about this infection, that can lead to sepsis, you will see that hormones enter the picture and theoretically, I suppose, if the ovaries are removed, there go the hormones. But I know I would worry about leaving the uterus behind if that is what this laproscopic spaying does. (I still am not clear, from the post above, whether the uterus remains, or not.)

Any medical decision requires weighing risk vs. benefit. It sounds like your mind is made up, but I thought I would share this little story in case you are unaware of potentially life-threatening uterine infections in dogs and want to learn more. Of course, Risk vs. Benefit is not seen in the same way by everyone.

(This info might be of interest to others who have older female dogs who have never been spayed.)

[fromHHDS]

The risk of developing a pyometra is so great for female dogs who keep their uterus, that I highly recommend a total OHE.

[Amory]

Because they don't want to spend the money on the specialized equipment needed. This does make the laparoscopic surgery more expensive. As far as leaving the uterus I feel if the ovary removal wasn't safe it wouldn't be recommended.

[graciegirl]

Because they don't want to spend the money on the specialized equipment needed. This does make the laparoscopic surgery more expensive. As far as leaving the uterus I feel if the ovary removal wasn't safe it wouldn't be recommended.

In humans, in a tubal ligation, that is in essence what happens. The uterus and the ovaries are left as well, but.......there are some similarities.

Tubal ligation What you can expect - Mayo Clinic (http://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/tubal-ligation/basics/what-you-can-expect/prc-20020231)

[Mrs. Robinson]

I am not at all familiar with any kind of spaying other than the method that has been around forever.

But I am familiar with pyometra in dogs.......

I had never heard of this potentially deadly uterine infection until a sweet little dog I know gave everybody a big scare. She was 10 pounds and 14 years old and had never been spayed because her owner was all about natural ways.....

Everything turned out OK. Warning signs were caught very early and the little dog is still with her family, after having a very late-in-life spaying.

If you choose to read more about this infection, that can lead to sepsis, you will see that hormones enter the picture and theoretically, I suppose, if the ovaries are removed, there go the hormones. But I know I would worry about leaving the uterus behind if that is what this laproscopic spaying does. (I still am not clear, from the post above, whether the uterus remains, or not.)

Any medical decision requires weighing risk vs. benefit. It sounds like your mind is made up, but I thought I would share this little story in case you are unaware of potentially life-threatening uterine infections in dogs and want to learn more. Of course, Risk vs. Benefit is not seen in the same way by everyone.

(This info might be of interest to others who have older female dogs who have never been spayed.)

The risk of developing a pyometra is so great for female dogs who keep their uterus, that I highly recommend a total OHE.

Because they don't want to spend the money on the specialized equipment needed. This does make the laparoscopic surgery more expensive. As far as leaving the uterus I feel if the ovary removal wasn't safe it wouldn't be recommended.

Thank you (Boomer & HHDS) for confirming what I've previously mentioned regarding laparoscopic surgery for dogs. Yes -- the uterus is still in tact because it is impossible to remove with that kind of surgery.

To the O.P., Amory -- yes -- removing the ovaries is safe, however, leaving the uterus may not be so safe.
Once again, I am curious to ask a third time:
Why are you so hell-bent on the laparoscoptic surgery if it means that leaving the uterus could present a serious future problem for your pet (a dog, I assume)???

I believe if you asked most vets why they don't perform that type of spay it isn't necessarily because of the cost of the equipment. It's probably because of the potential threat of what not removing the uterus could lead up to.

BTW -- none of this has anything to do with a tubal ligation which is not done on dogs.

[graciegirl]

Thank you (Boomer & HHDS) for confirming what I've previously mentioned regarding laparoscopic surgery for dogs. Yes -- the uterus is still in tact because it is impossible to remove with that kind of surgery.

To the O.P., Amory -- yes -- removing the ovaries is safe, however, leaving the uterus may not be so safe.
Once again, I am curious to ask a third time:
Why are you so hell-bent on the laparoscoptic surgery if it means that leaving the uterus could present a serious future problem for your pet (a dog, I assume)???

I believe if you asked most vets why they don't perform that type of spay it isn't necessarily because of the cost of the equipment. It's probably because of the potential threat of what not removing the uterus could lead up to.

BTW -- none of this has anything to do with a tubal ligation which is not done on dogs.


This article maintains that pyrometra is caused by hormones which stop being produced when the ovaries are removed.

Announcing a New Safer Alternative to Traditional Spaying (http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2011/04/14/ovariectomy-safer-alternative-to-pet-spaying.aspx)
Quoted from link above;

"Is It Safe to Leave the Uterus Behind?
Yes it is.
However, there are still plenty of veterinarians who continue to warn pet owners of the dangers of uterine infection and uterine cancer.
To be blunt, this is nonsense.
Uterine disease in dogs whose ovaries have been removed is almost nonexistent. The disease called pyometra, which is pus in the uterus, is the most common uterine problem in intact dogs. It is the result of the influence of the hormone progesterone, produced by the ovaries.
When the ovaries are removed, hormone production stops and it becomes impossible for pyometra to occur naturally.
Malignant uterine tumors in dogs with or without ovaries are an extremely rare occurrence at 0.003 percent of all canine tumors.
Above All, Do No Harm
Proponents of ovariectomy contend the U.S. preference for removing a healthy uterus rather than just the ovaries of a dog or cat flies in the face of medicine’s ruling principle to ‘do no harm.’
The majority of veterinarians continue to perform ovariohysterectomies because that’s what they were taught. It’s tradition.
In addition, not many vets are trained in laparoscopic surgery or own the expensive equipment required for this type of procedure.
As a profession we need to ask ourselves if we truly do no harm when we risk the possible complications involved in removing a healthy uterus – especially when removing that uterus serves no useful purpose.
From a report published in 2006 in the journal Veterinary Surgery:
Since 1981, after introduction of OVE [ovariectomy] as the standard technique for canine neutering at Utrecht University, no increase in short-term complications has been observed. With respect to long-term urogenital problems, including endometritis/pyometra and urinary incontinence, it has been clearly established that they do not occur more frequently with either technique. The overall chance for development of malignant uterine tumors is very low (0.003 %), and, in our opinion, does not warrant performing a potentially more traumatizing surgical procedure, OVH [ovariohysterectomy], that might be associated with more postoperative complications.
Without benefit of more prospective studies comparing surgical complications between OVE and OVH, most evidence extracted from the literature leads us to the conclusion that there is no benefit and thus no indication for removing the uterus during routine neutering in healthy bitches. Thus we believe that OVE should be the procedure of choice for canine gonadectomy."

NOTE:I have no dog in this fight because I have no dog. Just medical interest.

[graciegirl]

This article maintains that pyrometra is caused by hormones which stop being produced when the ovaries are removed.

Announcing a New Safer Alternative to Traditional Spaying (http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2011/04/14/ovariectomy-safer-alternative-to-pet-spaying.aspx)
Quoted from link above;

"Is It Safe to Leave the Uterus Behind?
Yes it is.
However, there are still plenty of veterinarians who continue to warn pet owners of the dangers of uterine infection and uterine cancer.
To be blunt, this is nonsense.
Uterine disease in dogs whose ovaries have been removed is almost nonexistent. The disease called pyometra, which is pus in the uterus, is the most common uterine problem in intact dogs. It is the result of the influence of the hormone progesterone, produced by the ovaries.
When the ovaries are removed, hormone production stops and it becomes impossible for pyometra to occur naturally.
Malignant uterine tumors in dogs with or without ovaries are an extremely rare occurrence at 0.003 percent of all canine tumors.
Above All, Do No Harm
Proponents of ovariectomy contend the U.S. preference for removing a healthy uterus rather than just the ovaries of a dog or cat flies in the face of medicine’s ruling principle to ‘do no harm.’
The majority of veterinarians continue to perform ovariohysterectomies because that’s what they were taught. It’s tradition.
In addition, not many vets are trained in laparoscopic surgery or own the expensive equipment required for this type of procedure.
As a profession we need to ask ourselves if we truly do no harm when we risk the possible complications involved in removing a healthy uterus – especially when removing that uterus serves no useful purpose.
From a report published in 2006 in the journal Veterinary Surgery:
Since 1981, after introduction of OVE [ovariectomy] as the standard technique for canine neutering at Utrecht University, no increase in short-term complications has been observed. With respect to long-term urogenital problems, including endometritis/pyometra and urinary incontinence, it has been clearly established that they do not occur more frequently with either technique. The overall chance for development of malignant uterine tumors is very low (0.003 %), and, in our opinion, does not warrant performing a potentially more traumatizing surgical procedure, OVH [ovariohysterectomy], that might be associated with more postoperative complications.
Without benefit of more prospective studies comparing surgical complications between OVE and OVH, most evidence extracted from the literature leads us to the conclusion that there is no benefit and thus no indication for removing the uterus during routine neutering in healthy bitches. Thus we believe that OVE should be the procedure of choice for canine gonadectomy."

NOTE:I have no dog in this fight because I have no dog. Just medical interest.

WAIT!

Is this Mercola the same one mentioned in the article I posted? If so, I don' t like alternative medicine at all. For Humans or Pets. Period and Amen.

Is this the same Mercola???

9 Reasons to Completely Ignore Joseph Mercola – Science-Based Medicine (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/9-reasons-to-completely-ignore-joseph-mercola-and-natural-news/)

[Mrs. Robinson]

WAIT!

Is this Mercola the same one mentioned in the article I posted? If so, I don' t like alternative medicine at all. For Humans or Pets. Period and Amen.

Is this the same Mercola???

9 Reasons to Completely Ignore Joseph Mercola – Science-Based Medicine (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/9-reasons-to-completely-ignore-joseph-mercola-and-natural-news/)

Yes, Gracie. It is the same Mercola.

[Boomer]

Here's to you, Mrs. Robinson. :beer3: You beat me to it. I was just getting ready to point out that Mercola is not a legit science source.

[CFrance]

I am not at all familiar with any kind of spaying other than the method that has been around forever.

But I am familiar with pyometra in dogs.......

I had never heard of this potentially deadly uterine infection until a sweet little dog I know gave everybody a big scare. She was 10 pounds and 14 years old and had never been spayed because her owner was all about natural ways.....

Everything turned out OK. Warning signs were caught very early and the little dog is still with her family, after having a very late-in-life spaying.

If you choose to read more about this infection, that can lead to sepsis, you will see that hormones enter the picture and theoretically, I suppose, if the ovaries are removed, there go the hormones. But I know I would worry about leaving the uterus behind if that is what this laproscopic spaying does. (I still am not clear, from the post above, whether the uterus remains, or not.)

Any medical decision requires weighing risk vs. benefit. It sounds like your mind is made up, but I thought I would share this little story in case you are unaware of potentially life-threatening uterine infections in dogs and want to learn more. Of course, Risk vs. Benefit is not seen in the same way by everyone.

(This info might be of interest to others who have older female dogs who have never been spayed.)
And I know of a sweet Golden Retriever who didn't make it through pyometra. Even with breeding bitches it is recommended that they have a hysterectomy after they have been bred a couple of times.

We never had a female dog, but our female cats did just fine after spaying.