Colic surgery - would you? And Insurance

S

Speedyfluff

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 July 2015
Messages
338
Location
Midlands
Visit site
Another thread got me thinking. If your horse needed colic surgery, would you put them through it? And if you didn't, and chose PTS, would the insurance pay out for the death of the horse? Or would they insist that it was sent for surgery?
 
I think with regards to insurance, the policy wouldn't pay out for death unless recommended by your Vet.

I have always said I wouldn't put one of my horses through colic surgery, however in cold reality with one of my beloved horses I am not sure exactly what I would decide. There are so many variables to colic though, so it's a decision that I think needs to be made at the time.
 
When my vet came out to my colicky mare he asked if I wanted to consider surgery if he couldn't get her comfortable. I said no, as I couldn't put her through that. He actually agreed with me and said too high a percentage get colic again afterwards plus he also feels it's a lot to put a horse through.
 
I've put two three year olds through colic surgery. One bounced back really well and has not colicked again and he is now 10. Unfortunately the other horse was pts in recovery.

I've always said I wouldn't put an older horse through colic surgery but think with a young horse it is a definite option.

As far as insurance goes it will depend on whether beva guidelines were met if the horse were pts before surgery. It is a tricky one as I had my old mare pts after a serious kick injury and knew the insurance would not pay out. Ironically if I had sent her for surgery - with only about a 10% chance of recovering the insurance would have paid out.
 
With insurance they will only pay out if the condition is incurable with no options available. So if the condition could be fixed surgically, insurers would not pay out if you chose to PTS.

If the chance of survival from GA procedure was minimal then they may consider it
 
No - wouldn't put one of ours through it - but then they're not insured, so the decision would be made by us and the vet, not someone pushing paper in an office somewhere.
 
No I wouldn't put a horse through colic surgery. And no the insurance company wouldn't pay out for the horse if surgery had been recommended.
 
I wouldn't put a horse through colic surgery, at the moment the odds on a successful outcome just aren't good enough for me.
Mine aren't insured so that wouldn't enter my considerations.
It's interesting that the general consensus seems they wouldn't pay out for PTS where surgery may be an option. There must be many horse whose insured value is way below that of surgery and its associated aftercare.
 
No i wouldn't. They likely suffer it again and again and again until they die or have to be pts anyway. If a mild bout can't be fixed by meds and walking about its game over im afraid.
 
eggs said:
I've put two three year olds through colic surgery. One bounced back really well and has not colicked again and he is now 10. Unfortunately the other horse was pts in recovery.

I've always said I wouldn't put an older horse through colic surgery but think with a young horse it is a definite option.

As far as insurance goes it will depend on whether beva guidelines were met if the horse were pts before surgery. It is a tricky one as I had my old mare pts after a serious kick injury and knew the insurance would not pay out. Ironically if I had sent her for surgery - with only about a 10% chance of recovering the insurance would have paid out.
Click to expand...

That's what's so mad about some insurance rules. They actually end up paying you more if you go through surgery and still lose the horse. And it doesn't seem fair because some horses cope really well with recovery and box rest, whilst others are climbing the walls. It doesn't seem right that an owner should be forced to put their horse through major surgery and lengthy box rest if they know it wouldn't cope with it.
 
Current stats for colic surgery is 1 in 10 die on the table or in recovery I think. My current boy hates being fiddled so I wouldn't do it to him but might not rule it out for a horse who would cope with the situation. (If I had the budget) although the stats would make me pretty cautious.
 
Amicsus said:
Current stats for colic surgery is 1 in 10 die on the table or in recovery I think. My current boy hates being fiddled so I wouldn't do it to him but might not rule it out for a horse who would cope with the situation. (If I had the budget) although the stats would make me pretty cautious.
Click to expand...


Current stats for still alive one year after the operation were, last time I looked, fewer than six out of ten. Many of the other three will have had a miserable time until someone called it a day. My vet told me, in confidence so they can't be named, that they do not think operating on colic cases is ethical.

I've known a four that have had it done. One recovered and went back to eventing. One died within two years of gut related problems. One died after two weeks. One died before it came home from hospital. I wouldn't put one of mine through it.
 
Last edited:
I think with a younger horse, I'd probably consider it, depending on the horse's general health and fitness. Although there are big risks, even then - a woman I know, who is a vet herself, lost her mare following colic surgery after she broke a leg in recovery coming round from the anesthetic :(. My own mare is 22 and is no longer insured for colic surgery, as I decided that it wouldn't be fair on her, given her age and her assorted other problems.
 
No, I really don't think I'd put any of mine through surgery, certainly none of the older ones. I might think about it for the youngster but even then, I doubt I'd go ahead, insured or not.
 
Think it is impossible to generalise about colic and therefore colic surgery.

For example, horse I know v well had colic surgery as a 9 year old, had a year off competition, and has since been getting double clears up to an including 2* 4 years later.

Obv. if your horse has an underlying condition which cannot be resolved by the surgery, it is not fair to put them through it, but for those that can be cured, why ever not, especially at a big vet hospital where the statistics are much better for survival. Key is also nursing after the op to get the gut working again.
 
Not just colic, but none of mine will have a GA. Vet knows this is my preference and if something is non-fixable without them having a GA, then its PTS.
Yes, they are dearly loved, but also my choice as to what to do, obviously armed with vet opinion.
This is the main reason i dont have insurance - I can choose what happens regarding treatment (but please dont read this that I would skimp!) but also that if i made a decision to PTS, then the financing of any future fuzzy comes out of my pocket, not a battle with insurance co.
 
AnShanDan said:
Think it is impossible to generalise about colic and therefore colic surgery.

For example, horse I know v well had colic surgery as a 9 year old, had a year off competition, and has since been getting double clears up to an including 2* 4 years later.

Obv. if your horse has an underlying condition which cannot be resolved by the surgery, it is not fair to put them through it, but for those that can be cured, why ever not, especially at a big vet hospital where the statistics are much better for survival. Key is also nursing after the op to get the gut working again.
Click to expand...


You have to generalise about it because you can't know until after the horse is opened up on the operating table exactly what the problem is.

The horse I know who survived two weeks was opened up, nothing was removed or repositioned, and he was closed up again. And he still died after two weeks of misery when he colicked for a second time.
 
I did. My horse was 17. He's 19 now and you'd never know he'd had surgery, he's bounces about like a loon. I wouldn't do it a second time with him, I think that would be establishing a pattern. It was a tough time, we got through it. The alternative was unthinkable.

I think recovery and survival can be very dependent on what part of the gut is affected and how much, if any, needs to be cut out as well as the reason for it in the first place and likelihood to recur.

My decision on whether or not I'd opt for colic surgery in the future if it was necessary for one of my horses depends on the individual horse. Four are a definite no (the one who's had it, an older mare with partial malabsorption and a potentially cancerous growth in her stomach,a miniature and a TB who's had a KS op, is prone to ulcers and has navicular syndrome), the other three would be a yes.
 
I'd like to think I'd be strong enough to say no and let them go in peace.

Insurance wouldn't pay out - silly really as the death cheque would likely be less than £5k for colic surgery - but they have rules not logic!
 
The Fuzzy Furry said:
Not just colic, but none of mine will have a GA. Vet knows this is my preference and if something is non-fixable without them having a GA, then its PTS.
Yes, they are dearly loved, but also my choice as to what to do, obviously armed with vet opinion.
This is the main reason i dont have insurance - I can choose what happens regarding treatment (but please dont read this that I would skimp!) but also that if i made a decision to PTS, then the financing of any future fuzzy comes out of my pocket, not a battle with insurance co.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much the same. I'd do a tie-back because it's very safe and life-changing. I'd probably do a broken splint bone removal. But I won't do much else that would need a GA, and I wouldn't do long term box rest either. When I go away on holiday I leave my vet with a written record of what I want done if a horse is critically ill or severely injured.
 
Ours are not insured, but I would not have colic surgery even if they were. A friend had a yearling colic, insurance declined to pay out if no surgery, the poor creature was travelled to the vets, was opened up, with a 1percent chance of full recovery, the horse was pts and the insurance paid up. I think it is a cynical ploy by the insurance companies, as they know most people will forgo the payout for the animals well being.
 
no I wouldn't. I always thought I might when I got my first horse but after years of issues, rehab and then having to PTS due to something else I decided I wouldnt put an animal or myself through it again (and my insurance company would have paid out £1000 in useless meds for an incurable condition rather than cough up for death when he was realistically worth less than that).

In my 20s I worked as a VN for a major equine practice and must have been present at a hundred colic surgeries. Accidents on recovery for any surgery were thankfully very rare but a lot of those colics came back, a majority of those were operated on again.
 
The Fuzzy Furry said:
Not just colic, but none of mine will have a GA. Vet knows this is my preference and if something is non-fixable without them having a GA, then its PTS.
Yes, they are dearly loved, but also my choice as to what to do, obviously armed with vet opinion.
This is the main reason i dont have insurance - I can choose what happens regarding treatment (but please dont read this that I would skimp!) but also that if i made a decision to PTS, then the financing of any future fuzzy comes out of my pocket, not a battle with insurance co.
Click to expand...

I don't follow your logic re insurance. If you're not bothered about financing any future fuzzy out of your own pocket, you can still totally make your own decisions if they're insured. Mine are insured for the least amount possible as regards worth, as I'm happy to pay for future horses, but I want the option of insurance to pay for the treatments I do want but might not be able to afford myself.
 
Not with my current horse as he's too old now and it wouldn't be fair, he's not insured any more, and I would pts rather than risk him suffering.
We're horse hunting at the moment though, and I wouldn't rule it out for a much younger horse, the new horse will be insured until it becomes not financially viable due to age, exclusions etc so I would never say never, just hope and prey I'm never in that position..
 
The Fuzzy Furry said:
Not just colic, but none of mine will have a GA. Vet knows this is my preference and if something is non-fixable without them having a GA, then its PTS.
Yes, they are dearly loved, but also my choice as to what to do, obviously armed with vet opinion.
This is the main reason i dont have insurance - I can choose what happens regarding treatment (but please dont read this that I would skimp!) but also that if i made a decision to PTS, then the financing of any future fuzzy comes out of my pocket, not a battle with insurance co.
Click to expand...

This exactly our position!
Funnily enough when the vet came to Draft mare's colic a year or so ago,her first words were "I think she is too old and too big for surgery to be a viabe option". I agreed whole-heartedly, although she is actually the most likely of a the horse I have ever had, to cope well with box rest. She would happily spend the entire winter inside, given the choice. I have wondered though if the advice woud have been the same if our horses had been insured.
 
Mine was 18 when pts due to colic, he was insured, it didn't cross my mind what the insurer would say. In my mind it was what was best for him not any one else. The vet asked if we would go down the Sergey route. It wasn't an option in my mind. He had arthritis of his coffin joint box rest for weeks wasn't an option. He had never coliced before x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top