HIGHLIGHTS OF RECENT CLINICALLY RELEVANT PAPERS
Lawson and co- workers in the UK and USA compared genetic inbreeding coefficients (F) of naturally occurring Thoroughbred Early Pregnancy Loss (EPL), Mid- and Late- term Pregnancy Loss (MLPL) and Controls . Allantochorion and fetal DNA from EPL ( n = 37, gestation age
14–65 days), MLPL ( n = 94, gestational age 70 days–24 h post partu- rition) and Controls ( n = 58) were genotyped. Inbreeding coefficients
using Runs of Homozygosity ( F ROH ) were calculated. ROHs were split into size categories to investigate the recency of inbreeding. MLPLs had significantly higher median number of ROH (188
interquartile range [IQR], 180.8–197.3), length of ROH (3.10, IQR 2.93–3.33) and total number of ROH (590.8, IQR 537.3–632.3) and
F ROH (0.26, IQR 0.24–0.28) when compared with the Controls and the EPLs. There was no significant difference in any of the inbreed- ing indices between the EPL and Controls. The MLPLs had a signifi- cantly higher proportion of long (>10 Mb) ROH (2.5%, IQR 1.6–3.6) than the Controls (1.7%, IQR 0.6–2.5). No unique ROHs were found in the EPL or MLPL populations. Inbreeding is a contributor to MLPLs, but not EPL in the UK
Thoroughbred population. Mating choices remain critical, because inbreeding may predispose to MLPLs by increasing the risk of homo- zygosity for specific lethal allele(s).
NERVE BLOCKS FOR FRONTONASAL SINUSOTOMY
The aim of this two- part study by Singen Elliott and co- workers in the USA was to determine if targeted blocking of frontal and infratroch- lear nerves provided anaesthesia for the approach to a frontonasal sinusotomy . A total of 12 horses were included in this study; six each in Parts
1 and 2. For Part 1, each horse had either frontal and infratrochlear nerve blocks or a line block performed with 2% mepivacaine hydro- chloride. Mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNT) were obtained at five sites along a proposed frontonasal sinusotomy prior to injec- tion, and at 10, 60 and 120 min after blocking. After a 4- day washout period, the opposite procedure was performed. Order of procedure and side of face were randomised. MNTs were analysed using mixed- model ANOVA. In Part 2, frontal and infratrochlear nerve blocks were performed followed by creation of a skin/periosteal incision, which was closed at 2 h. Ability to create and suture the incision, the size of the incision were recorded. For Part 1, both line and targeted blocks resulted in at least two
times an increase in median MNT values at each of the five sites, as compared to baseline MNT values. In Part 2, incisions could be com- pleted in five of six horses, with a median incision size of 6.5 × 5 cm. Following frontal and infratrochlear nerve blocks, MNTs were
increased along a proposed frontonasal sinusotomy, and skin inci- sions could be created in most horses. Frontal and infratrochlear nerve blocks provide an alternative technique to create a frontona- sal sinusotomy.
EQUINE ENTEROTYPHLOCOLITIS
This article by Luiza Zakia and co- workers in Canada described the pathogens detected and the histologic lesions found in horses with enterotyphlocolitis . The medical records of 208 horses in Ontario that were submit-
ted for postmortem examination were reviewed. Cultures were posi- tive in 67 of 208 (32%) equids for Clostridium perfringens , in 16 of 208 (8%) for Clostridioides difficile , and in 14 of 208 (7%) for Salmonella spp.; 6 of 208 (3%) were positive for Neorickettsia risticii by PCR assay. One horse was positive in a Rhodococcus equi PCR assay. All horses tested by PCR assay for equine coronavirus and Lawsonia in- tracellularis were negative. The histologic lesions were characterised as follows: 6 of 208 (3%) enteritis, 5 of 208 (2%) typhlitis, 104 of 208 (50%) colitis, 37 of 208 (18%) enterocolitis, 45 of 208 (22%) typhlo- colitis and 11 of 208 (5%) enterotyphlocolitis. The authors recommend standardised testing of diarrhoeic
horses during and/or after postmortem examination, as well as stan- dardised reporting of histologic lesions in enterotyphlocolitis cases.
Sue Wright
EVE Editorial Office Email:
sue@evj.co.uk
ORCID Sue Wright
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5513-8571
REFERENCES
Elliott , S.M. , Giancola , S.C. & Moorman , V. ( 2024 ) Evaluation of frontal and infratrochlear nerve blocks for standing sedated frontonasal sinusotomy in horses . Veterinary Surgery , 53 , 38 – 44 . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ vsu. 13997
Fazio , F. , Aragona , F. , Piccione , G. , Pino , C. & Gianetto , C. ( 2023 ) Cardiac biomarker responses to acute exercise in show jumping horses . Journal of Equine Veterinary Science , 128 , 104882 . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jevs. 2023. 104882
Lawson , J.M. , Shilton , C.A. , Lindsay- McGee , V. , Psifidi , A. , Wathes , D.C. , Raudsepp , T. et al. ( 2024 ) Does inbreeding contribute to pregnancy loss in Thoroughbred horses? Equine Veterinary Journal . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ evj. 14057 . Epub ahead of print.
Michotte , M. , Raes , E. & Oosterlinck , M. ( 2024 ) Diagnostic accuracy of plain radiography to identify synovial penetration in horses with traumatic limb wounds . Equine Veterinary Journal . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ evj. 14050 . Epub ahead of print.
Scala , E. , van Galen , G. , Skärlina , E.M. & Durie , I. ( 2023 ) Do post- surgical multiresistant urinary infections occur in horses? Case of unilateral pyelonephritis
caused by extended- spectrum beta- lactamase-
producing bacteria as a complication of cystotomy . Veterinary Medicine and Science , 9 , 2042 – 2052 . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ vms3. 1201
Zakia , L.S. , Arroyo , L.G. , Gomez , D.E. , Boerlin , P. , Surette , M.G. & Lillie , B.N. ( 2023 ) Postmortem examination of equids >1- year- old with enterotyphlocolitis in Ontario: a retrospective descriptive study . Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation , 35 , 349 – 353 . Available from: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 10406 38723 1176229
| 283
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
