SURGERY
Article sponsored by Petcam ®
Scrotal versus Prescrotal
Castration in Dogs
By Kimberly Woodruff, DVM, MS, Philip A. Bushby, DVM, DACVS, Karla Rigdon-Brestle, DVM, Robert Wills, DVM, PhD,
DACVPM, Carla Huston, DVM, MS, DACVPM
Article reprinted with permission of UBM Life Sciences –May 11, 2015. DVM360 MAGAZINE is a copyrighted publication of UBM Life
Sciences
For many years, the prescrotal technique has been
taught as the only acceptable method of canine
castration. o However, scrotal castration has gained
popularity in recent years as a safe alternative to
the prescrotal technique. First described in 1974, 2
this technique may offer the advantage of reducing
surgical time while not increasing complication rates
over the traditional prescrotal approach.
The scrotal technique has been described as an
accepted method for paediatric canine castrations. 1 It
is becoming widely accepted for adult canine
castrations by veterinary surgeons in high-volume
spay-neuter clinics, which often have limited
resources and many animals to sterilise. 3 Procedures
that reduce anaesthetic time and expedite the
surgical procedure by even a few minutes can be of
tremendous benefit to these programs.
Although numerous clinics perform the scrotal
technique, to our knowledge, there is no published
research documenting its complication rate or
comparing complications between the scrotal and
prescrotal techniques. Our study was conducted to
compare complication rates and surgical efficiency
between the two castration techniques in male dogs
more than 6 months old. We wanted to evaluate
the hypothesis that there are no differences in
complication rates between the two techniques.
COMPLICATIONS
Orchiectomy, like all surgeries, carries risks of
complication. While there is a perception that
scrotal castration in adult dogs is more prone to
vet360
Issue 02 | MAY 2019 | 18
complications than prescrotal castration is, limited
data are available comparing complication rates of
scrotal and prescrotal canine castrations. Data are
difficult to obtain because complications and degree
of detail of records vary by practitioner. 4,5 Additionally,
some minor complications occur at home and may
go unnoticed or unreported by owners. Complication
rates after prescrotal castrations have been reported
to range from 0% to 32%, with the incidence of
complications often considered to be lower in
younger patients. 4,6
Complications of both prescrotal and scrotal
techniques include dehiscence, scrotal swelling,
haemorrhage,
subcutaneous
bruising,
scrotal
haematoma and self-trauma to the surgical site. Dogs
with minor complications may need no intervention,
while others may require veterinary care. In one study
of 218 animals, seven dogs and two cats developed
scrotal haematoma after castration. 3,7 Dogs with
severe scrotal haematoma may experience necrosis
of the scrotal skin, necessitating a scrotal ablation. 7
In the past, scrotal castrations have been discouraged
because male dogs are considered to be scrotal
conscious. 8 The accepted thought has been that
disturbing the scrotal skin will cause excessive self-
mutilation by the patient, most likely because of
irritation caused by skin sutures. 3 For this reason,
several studies have discouraged clipping or prepping
the scrotum at all and have recommended draping
the scrotum out of the surgical field. 8 The potential for
self-mutilation has been given as the reason to avoid
performing scrotal castrations, despite the fact that
there is no reported scientific evidence supporting
this conclusion. 3