Caecal impactions: Diagnosis,management and prognosis |
| |
| Authors: | A Velloso Alvarez R Reid Hanson J Schumacher |
| |
| Institution: | Department of Clinical Science, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | A caecal impaction can be caused by an accumulation of dry ingesta (type I) or abnormal caecal motility resulting in a feed impaction of fluid consistency (type II). Horses that develop a caecal impaction have often been administered a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) during hospitalisation for treatment of a painful condition such as an ocular or orthopaedic disease. Clinical signs of caecal impaction can be mild, and progress to more moderate to severe signs of abdominal pain as the impaction enlarges. Since an impacted caecum has a high risk of rupture, early diagnosis and treatment are important. Horses with a caecal impaction can be treated medically or surgically, and treatment decisions are based on clinical signs, results of transrectal palpation, character of peritoneal fluid and response to medical management. For type I caecal impaction, medical management consists of aggressive fluid therapy, both intravenous and enteral, to soften ingesta. Fluid therapy can be combined with laxatives, motility-enhancing drugs and analgesic drugs. Surgery is indicated if results of transrectal abdominal examination indicate that the impaction is unchanged or has enlarged, signs of abdominal pain increase, or if there is cardiovascular deterioration. Horses with type II caecal impaction have a greater chance of survival if managed surgically. Using a ventral mid-line celiotomy approach, a caecal impaction can be resolved via a typhlotomy. When caecal motility is poor, or there are signs of chronic caecal dysfunction, a caecal bypass procedure (jejunocolostomy or ileocolostomy) should be considered. Although the prognosis for horses with a caecal impaction is claimed to be fair to good, choice of treatment is controversial and may influence prognosis. If the affected horse survives to discharge from the hospital, the long-term prognosis is generally good. Many retrospective studies of cases of caecal impaction are weakened by failure to distinguish between types I and II. |
| |
| Keywords: | horse caecum impaction management |
|
|
