University of Florida, Island Whirl Equine Colic Research Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, PO Box 100136, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0136, USA
Short-term survival after surgery for epiploic foramen entrapment compared with other strangulating diseases of the small intestine in horses
Article first published online: 5 JAN 2010
2005 EVJ Ltd
Equine Veterinary Journal
Volume 37, Issue 4, pages 292–295, July 2005
How to Cite
FREEMAN, D. E. and SCHAEFFER, D. J. (2005), Short-term survival after surgery for epiploic foramen entrapment compared with other strangulating diseases of the small intestine in horses. Equine Veterinary Journal, 37: 292–295. doi: 10.2746/0425164054529436
- Issue published online: 5 JAN 2010
- Article first published online: 5 JAN 2010
- Paper received for publication 24.01.05; Accepted 12.05.05
- epiploic foramen;
- small intestine
Reasons for performing study: Epiploic foramen entrapment (EFE) is one of the more common causes of colic in horses, but recent reports suggest a poor prognosis after surgical treatment.
Hypothesis: That EFE has a good prognosis compared with other small intestinal strangulating lesions.
Methods: Surgical findings, surgical procedures and short-term outcome were recorded for 157 horses that underwent surgery for strangulating lesions of the small intestine at the University of Illinois from 1994 to 2003. Horses were assigned to 3 groups for comparison; those with EFE, strangulation by lipoma and miscellaneous strangulating lesions. A logistic regression model and Monte Carlo tests of the binomial proportions were used to examine survival rates. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine differences in usage of surgical treatments. Measurements of length and viability indices were analysed using a one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey's HSD test, and viability scores were analysed using an exact Kruskal-Wallis test. Significance was set at P<0.05.
Results: Horses with EFE were significantly more likely to be discharged (95%) than those with the other conditions (P<0.05). The proportion of horses with ileal involvement was greater in horses with EFE than in the other 2 groups (P<0.05), although this did not affect outcome. The distributions of viability grades for EFE and lipoma differed significantly (P<0.05).
Conclusions: The prognosis for horses that had surgery at this hospital for EFE was better than for those with the other conditions, although the greater proportion of horses with EFE with ileal involvement could influence outcome. Therefore, surgeons must consider ways of improving jejunocaecostomy and determining when bowel is viable, the latter to avoid jejunocaecostomy.