{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,2]],"date-time":"2026-06-02T15:22:33Z","timestamp":1780413753478,"version":"3.54.1"},"reference-count":27,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]],"date-time":"2025-06-17T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1750118400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]],"date-time":"2025-06-17T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1750118400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/doi.wiley.com\/10.1002\/tdm_license_1.1"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Veterinary Surgery"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,2]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate three different jejunal transection angles for end\u2010to\u2010end jejunojejunostomies, comparing construction time, lumen size, and suture number.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Study design<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Ex vivo cadaver study.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Sample population<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Eight euthanized horses each had three mid\u2010jejunal specimens harvested.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Jejunal segments were assigned to one of three groups (A30, A45, and A60) and transected at 30, 45, or 60\u00b0, respectively. Following transection, a standardized handsewn single\u2010layer interrupted modified Lembert anastomosis was performed, and construction time and number of sutures placed were recorded. Anastomotic index (AI) was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using a one\u2010way ANOVA. Statistical significance was set at\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u2009.05.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Transected jejunal lengths increased as the transection angle decreased (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u2009.001). Anastomoses construction time was not different between groups (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u2009.301). The number of sutures required to complete the anastomosis was higher (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u2009.026) for A30 compared to A60 but was not different between A60 and A45 or A45 and A30 (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&gt;\u2009.333). Mean AI were 93.37, 114.29, and 135.07 for groups A60, A45, and A30 and the AI increased as the transection angle decreased (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u2009.001).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A 60\u00b0 transection angle reduced lumen size at the anastomosis but a 45 and 30\u00b0 transection angle resulted in an increased lumen size at the anastomosis. The 45\u00b0 angle did not increase the number of sutures required. The 30\u00b0 angle significantly increased the number of sutures required.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Clinical significance<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A 45\u00b0 angle of transection does not result in increased surgical time or number of sutures placed. Further investigation is required to determine the ideal angle of transection.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1111\/vsu.14294","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]],"date-time":"2025-06-17T06:09:53Z","timestamp":1750140593000},"page":"484-490","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["An ex vivo comparison of jejunal transection angles and the effect on lumen diameter following end\u2010to\u2010end jejunojejunal anastomoses"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"55","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-3400-1178","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Christopher M.","family":"Baldwin","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Equine Clinical Science Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Leahurst Campus  Neston UK"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2291-6389","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Alexandra","family":"Gillen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Equine Clinical Science Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Leahurst Campus  Neston UK"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_10_2_1","first-page":"536","volume-title":"Equine Surgery","author":"Freeman DE","year":"2018"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2460\/javma.1976.169.02.208"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/vsu.13679"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/vsu.13881"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2460\/ajvr.1985.46.10.2072"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/vr.c5251"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.2042-3306.2010.00340.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.2042-3306.2011.00423.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2006.00208.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2014.12120.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2014.12143.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2013.12081.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_14_1","article-title":"Ex vivo comparison of a UV\u2010polymerizable methacrylate adhesive versus an inverting pattern as the second layer of a two\u2010layer hand\u2010sewn jejunal anastomosis in horses: a pilot study","volume":"1","author":"Lenoir A","year":"2021","journal-title":"Vet Med Int"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2006.00206.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2012.00997.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2006.00209.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.2014.12188.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1053\/jvet.2003.50041"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/bjs.1800580815"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1053\/jvet.2000.7539"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.2042-3306.1993.tb02985.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2746\/042516402776117881"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2746\/0425164054529481"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1532-950X.1995.tb01362.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2746\/042516407X193963"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.2042-3306.2011.00515.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_10_28_1","first-page":"168","volume-title":"Manual of Equine Gastroenterology","author":"Ducharme NG","year":"2002"}],"container-title":["Veterinary Surgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/vsu.14294","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1111\/vsu.14294","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/vsu.14294","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,9]],"date-time":"2026-04-09T07:37:05Z","timestamp":1775720225000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/vsu.14294"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]]},"references-count":27,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,2]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/vsu.14294"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/vsu.14294","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0161-3499","1532-950X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0161-3499","type":"print"},{"value":"1532-950X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,17]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2024-09-13","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2025-05-30","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2025-06-17","order":3,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}