🔍 Key Findings
Study design: Randomized cadaveric comparison (n=20 dogs; ILR vs PDR)
Approaches:
- ILR = Intercostal in Left Lateral Recumbency (no OLV required)
- PDR = Paraxiphoid in Dorsal Recumbency (traditional)
Outcomes:
- Pericardiectomy time was shorter for ILR (p = .045)
- Pericardial fragment size was significantly larger in PDR group (p = .004; 23.21 cm² difference)
- Visibility and cardiac exposure were superior in PDR group
Feasibility:
- ILR approach was consistently successful in achieving partial pericardiectomy
- Bilateral ventilation was adequate; no need for OLV
Clinical relevance:
- ILR may improve efficiency when paired with TDL
- PDR remains preferable for cases requiring maximal pericardial resection
Simini Surgery Review Podcast
🔍 Key Findings
Study design: Randomized cadaveric comparison (n=20 dogs; ILR vs PDR)
Approaches:
- ILR = Intercostal in Left Lateral Recumbency (no OLV required)
- PDR = Paraxiphoid in Dorsal Recumbency (traditional)
Outcomes:
- Pericardiectomy time was shorter for ILR (p = .045)
- Pericardial fragment size was significantly larger in PDR group (p = .004; 23.21 cm² difference)
- Visibility and cardiac exposure were superior in PDR group
Feasibility:
- ILR approach was consistently successful in achieving partial pericardiectomy
- Bilateral ventilation was adequate; no need for OLV
Clinical relevance:
- ILR may improve efficiency when paired with TDL
- PDR remains preferable for cases requiring maximal pericardial resection
Simini Surgery Review Podcast
Know What Matters in the Literature - and Why
We distill peer-reviewed surgical studies into clinically relevant summaries and
exam-style questions, so you can make informed decisions with confidence.
Free Access. No Spam. Just Smarter Surgical Learning
Multiple Choice Questions on this study
Access the full library of surgical summaries and exam-style questions.
Educational content developed independently and supported by Simini.
The maker of Simini Protect Lavage.