Colic surgery.. would you put yours through it?

windand rain

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 November 2012
Messages
8,517
Visit site
no. the recovery rates shown look positive but I would only change my mind if they published 5 year post op stats. Its too expensive and isnt good enough for me to inflict the surgery pain and four months box rest on the ponies
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,552
Visit site
The problem with the 5 year post op stats, is that we tend not to have anything to compare them to...


?????

What would you compare them to? 100% risk of death if not operated on is the comparison I use (though it's not actually as bad as that, we don't know what the true figure is, so I use the worst possible.). And one third already dead at one year, even more at five years, is not good enough is for me, personally, ever to have one operated on.
 

milliepops

Wears headscarf aggressively
Joined
26 July 2008
Messages
27,538
Visit site
I think trying to make comparisons must be really difficult
Yes the ones not operated on might die, but as you have said upthread some might survive anyway because of good luck & appropriate treatment.
Without operating or at least opening up for a look it's not always known exactly what type of colic a horse has, how far gone they are, how long the horse has been unwell, causes, any complications etc so comparing like with like is impossible I would have thought.
 

Ddraig_wen

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 December 2014
Messages
394
Visit site
Usually I'd say no. I wouldn't put any of my current horses through it I think, however if I manage to buy the horse I'm looking at at the moment I think it would depend on the situation
 

Crazy_cat_lady

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 January 2012
Messages
6,888
Visit site
No. He is 21 now and his general temperament means he is very nervy and wouldn't cope with the hospitalisation, he also wont travel. I would try any non surgical treatment but if they said he needs surgery I'm afraid that would be it and he would be PTS. Both my mum and YO have a signed letter from me stating my wishes in the event I am not contact able.
I would also have to think long and hard about putting any horse through it especially having to live with the worry you could go through all that only to have it reoccur.
 

Shilasdair

Patting her thylacine
Joined
26 March 2007
Messages
23,686
Location
Daemon from Hades
Visit site
?????

What would you compare them to? 100% risk of death if not operated on is the comparison I use (though it's not actually as bad as that, we don't know what the true figure is, so I use the worst possible.). And one third already dead at one year, even more at five years, is not good enough is for me, personally, ever to have one operated on.

I don't think you understand the point I was making in response to Windand Rain's request for 5 year post op stats.
If you are taking 100% mortality as your baseline :p then the 5 year post op stats will always be better!
What I was trying to say is that, in order for 5 year post op stats to be meaningful then you need a control. Which we don't tend to have.
 

ponios

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 March 2016
Messages
201
Visit site
This all makes interesting reading.

Not that £ comes into the decision when it is welfare based, but if you decided against the colic surgery would insurance pay out on your horse (assuming you were covered for loss of animal)?
 

Shilasdair

Patting her thylacine
Joined
26 March 2007
Messages
23,686
Location
Daemon from Hades
Visit site
Points regarding pain - the last I heard the AHT were trying to research pain indicators in horses, as it can be hard to establish objectively.

My subjective view - I've had two horses undergo colic surgery, and there seems to be very little pain in comparison to, for example a fractured pedal bone, or even an abscess. But we don't mind 'putting a horse through' abscess recovery - or there would be very few left alive. :)

By the time you get a horse home from colic surgery, it doesn't even need bute.
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,552
Visit site
I don't think you understand the point I was making in response to Windand Rain's request for 5 year post op stats.
If you are taking 100% mortality as your baseline :p then the 5 year post op stats will always be better!
What I was trying to say is that, in order for 5 year post op stats to be meaningful then you need a control. Which we don't tend to have.


No, I don't understand the point you are making at all. This is not a question where you are testing one procedure against another and deciding which is better, or testing if the procedure works better than no procedure. The 'control group' is every horse where the owner decided to have the horse put to sleep instead of operate, and the death rate is 100%'

Of course the survival rate for operating is higher than that.

That point is that about one third of horses operated on don't make it to the first year. Survival post up, one year and five years are the only statistics that matter, surely?

What else do you think you can compare to? I am totally confused about what you are suggesting.
 

SpringArising

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 May 2014
Messages
5,255
Visit site
My subjective view - I've had two horses undergo colic surgery, and there seems to be very little pain in comparison to, for example a fractured pedal bone, or even an abscess. But we don't mind 'putting a horse through' abscess recovery - or there would be very few left alive. :)

There's no comparison to an abscess, and major surgery (and all that goes with it).
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,552
Visit site
This all makes interesting reading.

Not that £ comes into the decision when it is welfare based, but if you decided against the colic surgery would insurance pay out on your horse (assuming you were covered for loss of animal)?


No, they wouldn't pay out for loss if you turned down a vet's advice that the horse had a good chance of living if it was operated on.
 

Shilasdair

Patting her thylacine
Joined
26 March 2007
Messages
23,686
Location
Daemon from Hades
Visit site
I am totally confused about what you are suggesting.

Clearly. :p
You say 'Survival post up, one year and five years are the only statistics that matter, surely?' but that's not true. Such numbers tell you nothing without a control group.

And the control group is patently not the '100% mortality' euthanized group.
 

Hallo2012

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 June 2016
Messages
1,584
Visit site
the old boy (25) and the kids pony (total stress head in the stable wouldn't cope on box rest) absolutely no.

my 4yo-maybe. i would be prepared to go to the operating table and get and better answer and then still call it a day i think, if the prognosis was very poor.
 

Shilasdair

Patting her thylacine
Joined
26 March 2007
Messages
23,686
Location
Daemon from Hades
Visit site

ILuvCowparsely

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 April 2010
Messages
14,394
Visit site
Interesting subject, lady on my yard mentioned insuring specifically for colic surgery but was then shocked to hear I wouldn't put mine through it!
depends on the age of horse and temperament.


I did in 2015 put my donkey into surgery, she had compaction in the stomach and they had to inject fluids into the stomach to try break the impaction.
 

Merrymoles

Well-Known Member
Joined
21 January 2010
Messages
5,180
Location
Up t'dale
Visit site
I'm 99 per cent certain that I wouldn't.

I lost my last horse to colic and there was no way he would have coped with any sort of box rest - he hated being in. He would also have been at very high risk of stress laminitis. It was heartbreaking to let him go but at least I knew he was no longer in pain.

Current one would, on the other hand, cope well with box rest. However, he would not be happy travelling alone and he would be very unhappy in a strange place - he is quite needy about his routine and "his" people. I'm only 99 per cent sure because I guess I could be persuaded by a vet that I knew well and trusted if he or she thought the prognosis was good. However, 99 per cent of me thinks I would far rather he went at home without any unnecessary additional stress.
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,552
Visit site
Isn't there? Abscesses and laminitis among other lamenesses do seem to be much more painful for a horse than colic surgery recovery, in my experience.
Some interesting pain videos here - https://www.aht.org.uk/news/animal-health-trust-vet-champions-ridden-horse-welfare-with-video-series

There is a world of difference between putting a laminitic pony in a stable on a diet, or waiting a few days for an abscess to burst of its own accord and travelling to a hospital, giving a general anaesthetic and cutting through the stomach wall. There are plenty of people who completely disagree with a resection of the feet for laminitis, and that would be more comparable, imo.

Your experience is that your two recovered smoothly. This doesn't always happen. Wound healing issues, hernias and further colic episodes are very common. My own experience is that a horse I put on permanent loan was operated on because that's what the loanee wanted, had continuing grumbling colic for two weeks, then severe colic and was PTS. I struggle still with the knowledge that his last two weeks were of surgery, confusion and pain. It will never happen to another horse of mine.

.
 

YorksG

Over the hill and far awa
Joined
14 September 2006
Messages
16,142
Location
West Yorkshire
Visit site
This all makes interesting reading.

Not that £ comes into the decision when it is welfare based, but if you decided against the colic surgery would insurance pay out on your horse (assuming you were covered for loss of animal)?
A friend had a yearling operated on, as the insurance pushed for it, the animal had a stated 1%chance but they refused to pay for death if colic not operated on.
 

Tiddlypom

Carries on creakily
Joined
17 July 2013
Messages
22,235
Location
In between the Midlands and the North
Visit site
I have instructions for the vet in case of an emergency call out when I am unavailable pinned to my feed room board.

‘No horses are insured. No surgical colic for any horse, but full medical support is ok‘. It goes on to list the amounts for which I pre-authorise the vets to rack up in bills for each animal without consulting me, which is less for the retired old dear than it is for the two ridden horses.
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,552
Visit site
Clearly. :p
You say 'Survival post up, one year and five years are the only statistics that matter, surely?' but that's not true. Such numbers tell you nothing without a control group.

And the control group is patently not the '100% mortality' euthanized group.


Are you suggesting that a control group should be formed of horses which are believed to be dying of colic but they are left to die or survive with drug treatment only?

How do you feel that would add to our knowledge of colic surgery outcomes?

Do you think there is the slightest chance that it will show colic surgery to be no better for survival than drug only treatment? Because that would be the only reason to do it.

As it happens, I believe that control group was well established before colic surgery was possible and is exactly why colic surgery is carried out now. And why post operative survival rates are the ones people contemplating surgery need.



.
 

Shilasdair

Patting her thylacine
Joined
26 March 2007
Messages
23,686
Location
Daemon from Hades
Visit site
Are you suggesting that a control group should be formed of horses which are believed to be dying of colic but they are left to die or survive with drug treatment only?

How do you feel that would add to our knowledge of colic surgery outcomes?

Do you think there is the slightest chance that it will show colic surgery to be no better for survival than drug only treatment? Because that would be the only reason to do it.

As it happens, I believe that control group was well established before colic surgery was possible and is exactly why colic surgery is carried out now. And why post operative survival rates are the ones people contemplating surgery need.
.

I am enjoying your post far more than I should.
 

blitznbobs

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 June 2010
Messages
6,248
Location
Cheshire
Visit site
Isn't there? Abscesses and laminitis among other lamenesses do seem to be much more painful for a horse than colic surgery recovery, in my experience.
Some interesting pain videos here - https://www.aht.org.uk/news/animal-health-trust-vet-champions-ridden-horse-welfare-with-video-series
The problem is there is no way to objectively assess pain- as. A human pain specialist for many years it is almost impossible to assess objectively because pain is a subjective experience. What I do know is that in humans at least laparotomies are one of the most painful procedures to undergo - with the need for morphine type opiates at the highest and these then rarely control the pain - the inability to nerve block the abdomen successfully without delaying healing also removes that option whilst it’s fairly easy to nerve block a limb... I’ve has an abscess I’ve had abdominal surgery and I know which incapacitated mme more
 

sport horse

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 January 2002
Messages
1,908
Visit site
No I would would not put a horse through colic surgery .
The economics of it don’t add up and ehically it falls , for me ,on the wrong side of the line of whats fair to put a horse through .

I had always thought like this until last year I was faced with the decision for a home bred, very talented 7 year old show jumper. I had a long decision with the surgeon and hesitantly decided to go ahead and the horse was operated on at 2am. The horse was fit (until the colic and she had had excellent treatment by my own vets leading up to transfer to the referral vet so the horse was well hydrated etc) and young and strong. She came through it and recovered and is back out competing.

I would not make the same decision for any horse and the decision has to be partly economic, but mostly welfare related and dependant on the presentation of symptoms to the expert vet.

I can only say that we all have great thoughts but when you are actually faced with the decision only then will you know what you decide!
 

Orangehorse

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 November 2005
Messages
13,204
Visit site
When mine was younger, yes probably. But since he had to do box rest for a leg injury about 6 years ago and was a complete and utter nightmare through the rehab period (heaven only knows how he didn't kill us both) and now he is over 20 and has arthritis, all things considered probably not. I know that hind gut colics are more successful that higher up, but I think it if couldn't be cured at home then I would be very reluctant to take him for an operation. The one I know best was a 20 year old who travelled for over an hour, had the operation and then died in the recovery room, so the poor owner was left with a big bill and no horse and great regret that she put her horse through it.

Finance would come into it as he is no longer insured but although he seems a chilled sort of character my experiences of the previous box rest show that he isn't, he has a temper and hated box rest.
 
Top