Navicular: can the damage be reversed?

[cptrayes]

If you want to jump on the bandwagon with other lemmings thats up to you. I certainly won't be! My four year and 2 month Fulltime trained farrier will remain the only person to do my horses feet. He has done them since her very first trim at 6 months old and I am often complemented on her lovely shaped feet. feet.

I didn't jump on any bandwagon Tnavas, I was behind it pushing the damn thing to get it rolling. I fought like crazy in the early days to ensure that horse and hound online was a place that barefoot could be discussed without people being attacked and ridiculed.

I trim for myself. I haven't had a days training in my life. I am complemented on my horses performance, I am not interested in how pretty the feet are, just how functional. Personally I would be embarrassed to have a horse which went footsore because of dry ground. And I certainly wouldn't be nailing shoes on it before working out why.

How you dare to post on here, from NZ, having never been involved with rehabbing unsound horses, and never having had a hard working barefoot horse of your own, telling people here in the UK that trimmers are no good and that barefoot is 'just no shoes' beats me . You've got more nerve than me, and that really saying something!

It is a shame, because NZ has a big and successful record of barefoot and we could learn from it, just not from people like you.

 

[Leg_end]

Here, here Alyth. There is a huge opportunity due to the internet of sharing our experiences with the world. I don't like to make statements unless they are based on fact and I get incredibly frustrated by people who make such broad sweeping statements that have no foundation at all in this day and age. Unfortunately barefoot is not seen as a run of the mill treatment for navicular and until that changes we will only see a handful of proven experiences that it can be treated and cured. My experience proves that navicular disease/syndrome (which is essentially heel pain and can be a whole host of symptoms including soft tissue and bone damage) is not degenerative if the cause of the degeneration is removed.

Barefoot rehab is not just taking the shoes off, it is a management system based on diet and exercise and unless you are very lucky you will not be able to bring an injured horse back without this system. Normal (ie no injuries or damage) horses seem to cope far better with a basic shoes off management style.

Tnavas - following your earlier comment about the impossibility of navicular bone damage being repaired I'd still like your comments on the X-rays I posted.

 

[Tnavas]

I didn't jump on any bandwagon Tnavas, I was behind it pushing the damn thing to get it rolling. I fought like crazy in the early days to ensure that horse and hound online was a place that barefoot could be discussed without people being attacked and ridiculed.

I trim for myself. I haven't had a days training in my life. I am complemented on my horses performance, I am not interested in how pretty the feet are, just how functional. Personally I would be embarrassed to have a horse which went footsore because of dry ground. And I certainly wouldn't be nailing shoes on it before working out why.

How you dare to post on here, from NZ, having never been involved with rehabbing unsound horses, and never having had a hard working barefoot horse of your own, telling people here in the UK that trimmers are no good and that barefoot is 'just no shoes' beats me . You've got more nerve than me, and that really saying something!

It is a shame, because NZ has a big and successful record of barefoot and we could learn from it, just not from people like you.

My horse is barefoot - all 32 of my school horses and ponies were barefoot - trimmed by a registered farrier.

My beef is with the people who declare that barefoot trimmers are the only ones capable of trimming horses.

Summer here can be extremely dry - drought conditions and my mare was in extremely hard work, and her feet just didn't grow enough to compensate for the wear.

She went sore a week out from Horse of the Year and being shod protected her feet from the extra wear. The week after HOY she had the shoes removed and hasn't been sore since. It was just one of those things.

 

[Tnavas]

Tnavas - following your earlier comment about the impossibility of navicular bone damage being repaired I'd still like your comments on the X-rays I posted.

What I see is two Xrays with different exposures - the one on the left shows the darker area - but if you compare the whole Xray to the one on the right there is NO change only a lighter Xray with shadowy areas lost to view because of the light.

 

[cptrayes]

What I see is two Xrays with different exposures - the one on the left shows the darker area - but if you compare the whole Xray to the one on the right there is NO change only a lighter Xray with shadowy areas lost to view because of the light.

So her vet can't read x rays

You take the biscuit, you really do!

 

[cptrayes]

My horse is barefoot - all 32 of my school horses and ponies were barefoot - trimmed by a registered farrier.

My beef is with the people who declare that barefoot trimmers are the only ones capable of trimming horses.

Summer here can be extremely dry - drought conditions and my mare was in extremely hard work, and her feet just didn't grow enough to compensate for the wear.

She went sore a week out from Horse of the Year and being shod protected her feet from the extra wear. The week after HOY she had the shoes removed and hasn't been sore since. It was just one of those things.

I have not seen anyone on this forum in years claim that only barefoot trmmers can trim feet. You are so.o.o.o.o. out of date.

So you are another person who ramped up the work quicker than the feet can adjust to, and then say 'they can't all do it you know!.' And call those of us who can do it names?

Have you actually checked your farrier's syllabus? Because in the UK they spend four years in training with a syllabus that does not cover trimming unshod horses for hard work. Qualified trimmers have a lot more training than the average farrier in that regard.

I'm glad you are happy with your farrier. Not everyone in the UK is so lucky. Mine lamed both of mine.

Could you possibly back off telling people in another country that you are completely out of touch with, trimming wise, that they shouldn't be using trimmers? it's annoying me now. Thank you

 

[Tnavas]

I have not seen anyone on this forum in years claim that only barefoot trmmers can trim feet. You are so.o.o.o.o. out of date.

So you are another person who ramped up the work quicker than the feet can adjust to, and then say 'they can't all do it you know!.'

And where did I say that?

My horse in 11 years has worn a set of shoes for a total of 14 days. She went slightly sore a week before HOY which is at the tail end of summer. With drought conditions her feet weren't able to cope with the ground conditions. If we hadn't been going to HOY I would have given her a few days off to allow her feet to recover but we had a big competition to go to, so she had shoes! What's wrong with ensuring that my horse wasn't in pain?

I've worked in various yards with 100+ horses and never had problems with shod horses. Therefore I feel no need to become obsessed with barefoot trimming.

If someone wants to put shoes on their horse that is their choice. As I've pointed out, fossilised horses showed signs of Navicular, yet had never had their feet touched by a human. Therefore it can't necessarily be shoeing that causes these problems

 

[Leg_end]

What I see is two Xrays with different exposures - the one on the left shows the darker area - but if you compare the whole Xray to the one on the right there is NO change only a lighter Xray with shadowy areas lost to view because of the light.

OK... Although the change is slight it is definitely there. I'm sure you will forgive me for taking the opinion of my vet (who is on the board of RCVS), two other vets at the practice and an ortho specialist over yours

 

[ester]

Which has been said by several people already - both shod/unshod can not use the back of their foot correctly, shod are probably more predisposed as they don't have a frog on the ground to use.

my farrier admitted he didn't know enough about barefoot rehab to do Frank, I therefore have a trimmer and a sound pony who will hopefully be hunting on Wednesday and dressaging on Sunday , although I mostly do him myself currently, she just checks up on me.

 

[OwnedbyJoe]

Wow.
I live in Western Australia. We have a drought every year! We also have a farrier profession that is essentially unregulated.
All 5 of mine are happily barefoot, and I trim them myself, having been trained by an old school farrier who thought all "barefooters" were nuts! He also states that ALL high performance horses need shoes... My barefoot endurance pony would beg to differ, and it fascinates me that the trim he taught could so easily be used to trim barefoot horses.
It also endlessly fascinates me that people in the UK are told you can't do barefoot because it's too wet, while over here we are told it can't be done because it's too dry and hard!
Fossilized horses with navicular?? Given the subtlety of the changes with navicular those must be some seriously well preserved fossils.
Anyway - back to the remodelling argument... Tnavas, splints, fracture callus and shin "thickening" are actually all examples of a bone remodelling to adapt to the strains placed on it! The bone ends up the shape it needs to be to best deal with the forces placed on it.
Splints don't go down completely because the very act of throwing a splint changes the attachment of the splint bone to the cannon bone, therefore the stress on that area remains "abnormal". We're just lucky that abnormal strain doesn't make the horse lame.
Thickened shin bones stay thick because the horse stays in work and there is no altered strain to reduce that thickening with a horse in normal work/activity. There is NO biological drive to change that shape.
Change those strains, as we do with changing the trim/taking a horse barefoot, and you would change the shape of the bone.
P.S. Ester, you have a GREAT Farrier. Not enough of that sort of humility in the profession as a whole if you ask me.

 

[Tnavas]

Wow.

Fossilized horses with navicular?? Given the subtlety of the changes with navicular those must be some seriously well preserved fossils.
Anyway - back to the remodelling argument...

Tnavas, splints, fracture callus and shin "thickening" are actually all examples of a bone remodelling to adapt to the strains placed on it! The bone ends up the shape it needs to be to best deal with the forces placed on it.
Splints don't go down completely because the very act of throwing a splint changes the attachment of the splint bone to the cannon bone, therefore the stress on that area remains "abnormal". We're just lucky that abnormal strain doesn't make the horse lame.
Thickened shin bones stay thick because the horse stays in work and there is no altered strain to reduce that thickening with a horse in normal work/activity. There is NO biological drive to change that shape.
Change those strains, as we do with changing the trim/taking a horse barefoot, and you would change the shape of the bone.
P.S. Ester, you have a GREAT Farrier. Not enough of that sort of humility in the profession as a whole if you ask me.

A little confused as to what you are referring to - I know that damaged bone does not go back to what it was prior to the damage! Splints, Shin splints, Navicular bones once damaged stay damaged.

This is a damaged Navicular Bone - it will not return to the smooth edged bone it was prior to the damage

 

[ester]

I'm really not sure I would refer to is as 'damaged' bone, I don't think that is a very accurate way to describe it.

 

[Tnavas]

I'm really not sure I would refer to is as 'damaged' bone, I don't think that is a very accurate way to describe it.

Well how would you describe it?

It has pieces missing and extra spurs around it - to me that bone is damaged.

An undamaged bone is very clean and smooth.

 

[ester]

Changed. Altered.

I think that is what OwnedbyJoe was getting at, they alter, biologically they may well alter back again or in a different way if the pressure in that area is removed. But for reasons ObJ describes the changes themselves do mean that complete remodelling often isn't advantageous for the horse but that for instance if going barefoot changes the pressures on the pedal bone then it will remodel, as leg-end's x-rays show. The suggestion is that it does have the capacity to return to it's pre-damaged state if conditions are right for it to do so.

 

[amandap]

HORSES ARE PRONE TO THESE PROBLEMS BY THEIR CONFORMATION!

If this statement is correct then surely we need to think carefully before we subject them to 'work'? Why do we add stresses and strains to an animal prone to such conformation problems? That statement opens a huge can of ethical issues and worms.
I do not believe the problems mentioned are caused by conformation myself.

 

[cptrayes]

This is a damaged Navicular Bone - it will not return to the smooth edged bone it was prior to the damage

How do you know that it won't remodel to an edge smooth enough to restore soundness?

If a bone broken right through can rejoin, why can't that edge go smooth again once whatever caused that damage is removed? I lost a whole inch from my forearm bone three years ago. It's back now though.

I'll bet that photo was taken when the old mantra that the navicular bone has no periosteum and therefore can't heal itself was still believed. Was that horse shod? How lame was it? What soft tissue injuries were associated with any lameness? How were they treated?

Tnavas, if a weak back of the foot causes that damage, as is likely, and the treatment given did not address the weak back of the foot, as is likely, then you get a self fulfilling prophesy that the bone cannot heal. Until we stop treating heel lameness the way it has always been treated, it will continue to be the case that the bone will not heal.

Barefoot rehabs are showing bone healing, and the more we do the more evidence there will be, I'm sure , that the old belief is simply a result of the lack of effective treatment that was given to horses with heel pain in the past.

 

[Tnavas]

Cptrayes

A fracture NEVER heals without leaving a visible change to the bone. That is why forensic pathologists can use bone injuries to identify bodies.

You break your arm, the repair is visible on an X-ray for the rest of your days.

If bone throws up a lump it stays. If the stress is removed the lump/roughness won't get any bigger unless the stress is put back on it.

Heel pain may not be the root of the problem but the sign that there is a problem.

Example. I have two fingers that permanently tingle - there is nothing wrong with my fingers, I have a pinched nerve in my elbow.

I have never heard anywhere that it was believed the Navicular bone had no Periostium.

 

[Lucyad]

I struggle to see how it can't remodel like a fracture - I have spent lots of time staring at xrays of my horse's fractured tibia. First it opened wider as the bone died off, then started to knit, chips actually disappeared as were reabsorbed, it grew itself a huge lump of extra bone to support itself, and now the extra lump is shrinking away and the bone edges seem to be reverting to their previous shape. Absolutely amazing. Seems the bone has a memory and is growing back to the same shape that it knows it should be.

Wouldn't the same sort of thing happen to other bones if damaged?

ETA - cross posted with above - is it the case that a lump is never re-absorbed? My horse's does appear to be shrinking?

 

[Tnavas]

I struggle to see how it can't remodel like a fracture - I have spent lots of time staring at xrays of my horse's fractured tibia. First it opened wider as the bone died off, then started to knit, chips actually disappeared as were reabsorbed, it grew itself a huge lump of extra bone to support itself, and now the extra lump is shrinking away and the bone edges seem to be reverting to their previous shape. Absolutely amazing. Seems the bone has a memory and is growing back to the same shape that it knows it should be.

Wouldn't the same sort of thing happen to other bones if damaged?

ETA - cross posted with above - is it the case that a lump is never re-absorbed? My horse's does appear to be shrinking?

See my post above.

Break a bone and the evidence is there forever

 

[cptrayes]

Cptrayes

A fracture NEVER heals without leaving a visible change to the bone. That is why forensic pathologists can use bone injuries to identify bodies.

You break your arm, the repair is visible on an X-ray for the rest of your days.

If bone throws up a lump it stays. If the stress is removed the lump/roughness won't get any bigger unless the stress is put back on it.

Heel pain may not be the root of the problem but the sign that there is a problem.

Example. I have two fingers that permanently tingle - there is nothing wrong with my fingers, I have a pinched nerve in my elbow.

I have never heard anywhere that it was believed the Navicular bone had no Periostium.

Tnavas it is absolutely irrelevant whether the profile is the same or not, what matters is the functionality. If the bone returns smooth, then there is no reason that the ddft will catch on it and the horse will become sound again.

And there is no reason why the bone should not return to a functional size and shape.

Lumps on bones DO NOT always remain, they can be remodeled over several years. You are absolutely wrong about that.

In this country, it is now widely recognised that heel pain causing a toe first landing is the cause of navicular syndrome, though the lameness is almost always caused by ddft damage, not bone damage. Many strains of the collateral ligaments or impar ligament, caused by weak heels and or/lateral imbalance are misdiagnosed as navicular syndrome.

 

[cptrayes]

See my post above.

Break a bone and the evidence is there forever

That isn't relevant. How many people who once broke a leg are lame? The functionality is what counts. And the original lump from the injury DOES reduce in size, considerably, it is not there for all time.

 

[Morgan123]

My horse is 14 and has been barefoot since he was 6. This year he was diagnosed with navicular changes and sidebone via X-ray/MRI and is still not right after four months off. Several vets and farriers have all commented that they see these things more frequently in barefoot horses than shod, sidebone particularly. They have no vested interest in saying that, they weren't trying to persuade me to use shoes, they were just commenting.

Just saying. It's really not as black and white and 'barefoot good for navicular, shoes bad' as you're all suggesting. Presumably it depends on the horse, the workload, the farrier, the conformation, etc etc.

 

[cptrayes]

My horse is 14 and has been barefoot since he was 6. This year he was diagnosed with navicular changes and sidebone via X-ray/MRI and is still not right after four months off. Several vets and farriers have all commented that they see these things more frequently in barefoot horses than shod, sidebone particularly. They have no vested interest in saying that, they weren't trying to persuade me to use shoes, they were just commenting.

Just saying. It's really not as black and white and 'barefoot good for navicular, shoes bad' as you're all suggesting. Presumably it depends on the horse, the workload, the farrier, the conformation, etc etc.

I agree that it's not black and white but the fact remains that on the only, inadequate and incomplete data that we have, a horse is at least four times more likely to return to full work when treated with a barefoot rehab than it is with remedial shoeing and medication.

I would like to see their evidence on the incidence of foot lameness in shod versus unshod horses. I think you posted what your vets said before, and I think that's the only time I've ever heard it, though I'm open to hearing from other vets and farriers if they believe the same. One thing is not in doubt, and that's that the lateral cartilages in working barefoot horse are much bigger than those in shod ones, as a general rule. Presumably whatever creates that size could theoretically lead on to side bone, but at the moment yours is the only horse I have heard that connection made about.

It should also be noted that ossification of the lateral cartilages is an entirely normal part of the aging process of a horse.

 

[Morgan123]

Yes, I didn't manage unfortunately to get the chance to ask them if they had evidence to back this up but will if I get the chance they were all commenting on their personal experiences.

So what would you do with a horse like mine, that's been barefoot and fine for Yeats and THEN had the problems? Out of interest.

Personally I think the next things I will try (in consultation with vet and farrier) will probably be shoes for him but I'll see how we go.

 

[Morgan123]

Yes, I didn't manage unfortunately to get the chance to ask them if they had evidence to back this up but will if I get the chance they were all commenting on their personal experiences.

So what would you do with a horse like mine, that's been barefoot and fine for Yeats and THEN had the problems? Out of interest.

Personally I think the next things I will try (in consultation with vet and farrier) will probably be shoes for him but I'll see how we go.

 

[cptrayes]

Yes, I didn't manage unfortunately to get the chance to ask them if they had evidence to back this up but will if I get the chance they were all commenting on their personal experiences.

So what would you do with a horse like mine, that's been barefoot and fine for Yeats and THEN had the problems? Out of interest.

Personally I think the next things I will try (in consultation with vet and farrier) will probably be shoes for him but I'll see how we go.

Has he had an MRI scan? If not, you don't really know what is causing his lameness, because established side bone and navicular bone changes would not normally do it.

I also don't know what work he is doing, and how he is landing. Is he toe first? If so, and he is free of thrush, then I would be walking and walking and walking, in hand if necessary, until he was sound.

If he's heel first or flat, I'd be stumped. If he's got spurs on the navicular bone, I'd be much less certain of a good outcome short or medium term. I've no idea about long term, because the only one I've been involved with was put down after less than a year.

Is it certain that the pain is coming from inside his feet and not the soles? Is it impossible for him to be a little laminitic? Does he have good strong heels and a frog in contact with the floor?

So many questions, sorry, but foot lameness is so many different things.

It would take a lot to persuade me that shoes were the answer, but if you shoe him and he returns to work, then handsome is as handsome does.

 

[cptrayes]

Are you anywhere near me near Manchester Morgan? I am fascinated by lame barefooters and would be really happy to give my amateur opinion if it is feasible. I've had experience of only two, and for both the answer was lots of slow work on hard surfaces.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

I'm pretty sure that Rockley have had lame BF horses in for rehab.

 

[cptrayes]

I'm pretty sure that Rockley have had lame BF horses in for rehab.

Several. They all have the same problem as the shod ones, a weak back half of the foot. I used to own one that went there and I know exactly how he got into difficulties - an owner at school, too little work, too little turnout because of wet fields and dark nights, and a sudden increase in activity in March. Bang! He was a horse I hunted barefoot with no problem at all.

 

[ester]

That isn't relevant. How many people who once broke a leg are lame? The functionality is what counts. And the original lump from the injury DOES reduce in size, considerably, it is not there for all time.

This, just because you can see some evidence of an old injury on xray it doesn't mean it hasn't remodelled at all - and if you were to x-ray over time you would see the evidence changing. I don't understand why that is so hard to get, and ditto what cpt says about functionality - it doesn't have to look perfect if it works again!

I don't think we need to go checking for pinched nerves in their elbows just yet, lets sort out what we do have evidence for first.