A simple explanation of differences needed please!

[mturnbull]

Hello,

Im hoping someone can give me a simple answer as was confused with google! These questions have been popping up over the last few weeks as I am currently waiting on my new foalie so looking after other horses at a large livery yard and 3 of them are on box rest for different reasons and on different medication and from this and past experiences started to notice small differences and just not sure why!

What is the difference between the drugs sedalin and relaquine? Do they do a different purpose or is it more of brand and slightly different ingredents?

Also what is the differences between equipalizone, bute or dannillon as depending on the circumstances or which vets practise has been called out a different drug is prescribed.

and finally is the metacam for horses just the same stuff as the metacam for dogs?

Not looking for anything too complex, more curiosity than anything else and google and books just dont do simple talk!

Thanks

 

[Black_Horse_White]

I think the difference between bute & danillon is danillon is coated in sugar so it's more palatable and gentler on the horses stomach. And Metacam is the same only given in higher doses obviously.

 

[alsiola]

Sedalin and Relaquine are identical products. Relaquine is marginally cheaper. (I prefer relaquine because the spinny wheel to adjust the dose is pre-spun to 0ml not to 10ml!)

Equipalazone is one tradename for phenylbutazone (bute). Danilon is suxibuzone, which when absorbed by the horse is converted into phenylbutazone. There has never been any difference shown between the two products in terms of effect, or in terms of side effects. Most vets would agree that they see no clinical difference between the two products. It is eaten better by some horses, but is ~20p more expensive per sachet.

Metacam for horses is the same drug as metacam for dogs, but in a more concentrated solution. It is the same type of drug as bute/danilon, but is more COX-2 selective (if you want a simple answer I won't go into this!). It is much more expensive. The manufacturers have done many studies showing benefits in vitro, but to my knowledge have not yet demonstrated any improvement in hard clinical outcomes, such as resolution of lameness, or survival after colic surgery. In my opinion, its use in horses as a first line treatment cannot be justified due to the lack of evidence of any benefit over cheaper options.

 

[mturnbull]

Thank you for your replies! My curiosity has been answered