Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Eileen K. Sullivan x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To determine the odds of moderate or severe gastric ulceration in racehorses treated with various antiulcer medications.

Design—Unmatched case-control study.

Animals—798 horses in active race training (252 Thoroughbreds and 546 Standardbreds). Only horses that had been receiving a single antiulcer medication or no antiulcer medication for at least 2 weeks prior to examination were included.

Procedure—Gastroscopy was performed on each horse by a single individual who was not aware of the horses' antiulcer treatments, and severity of gastric ulceration was scored. Signalment and medication history were recorded. Logistic regression was used to determine whether identification of moderate or severe ulceration was associated with treatment, age, breed, or sex. Treatments were grouped as no treatment, buffer, sucralfate, histamine type 2 receptor antagonist, compounded omeprazole, proprietary omeprazole at a low dosage, and proprietary omeprazole at a high dosage.

Results—Only proprietary omeprazole was associated with significantly lower odds of moderate or severe ulceration, compared with no treatment. Risks of moderate or severe gastric ulceration in horses receiving a buffer, sucralfate, a histamine type 2 receptor antagonist, or compounded omeprazole were not significantly different from risks in horses receiving no antiulcer medication.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that the proprietary formulation of omeprazole was associated with a significantly lower risk of moderate or severe gastric ulceration, compared with no treatment, in racehorses in active race training, whereas other antiulcer medications were not. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:336–339)

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association


Objective—To describe the pool-raft recovery system protocol and to evaluate the clinical outcome inhorses that underwent recovery from general anes-thesia using this system.

Design—Retrospective study.

Animals—393 horses that underwent recovery fromgeneral anesthesia in the pool-raft system.

Procedure—Anesthetic records were examined fromhorses recovered from anesthesia in the pool-raft sys-tem between January 1984 and December 2000.Complete medical records of horses were examinedwhen available. Information regarding the anestheticand recovery period was recorded. Horses first recov-ered from general anesthesia in the pool-raft and,once awake, were transported to a recovery stall andlowered to the floor in a standing position.

Results—351 horses underwent 1 pool-raft recovery,and 42 horses underwent multiple pool-raft recover-ies. Most horses were recovered from general anes-thesia within the pool-raft system to safeguard repairof a major orthopedic injury. During 471 pool-raftrecoveries, 34 (7%) horses had complications withinthe recovery pool and 62 (13%) had complicationswithin the recovery stall. Deaths resulted from complete failure of internal fixation, pulmonary dysfunc-tion, or a combination of pulmonary dysfunction andfixation failure in 2% (10/471) of horses that under-went pool-raft recoveries.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The pool-raftsystem is a good option for recovery from generalanesthesia. Although not a fail-safe system, itappears to decrease the complications of recoveringhorses in a high-risk category. Potential disadvan-tages of this system are added expense and man-power necessary in building, maintenance, andusage, as well as size limitations of the raft itself. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:1014–1018)

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association