FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Equine veterinary journal1999; 31(3); 203-207; doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03173.x

Caesarean section and other methods for assisted delivery: comparison of effects on mare mortality and complications.

Abstract: Data from 116 mares that had caesarean section or vaginal delivery at 2 university hospitals were analysed in 5 groups, as follows: dystocia corrected by caesarean section, Group DCS (n = 48); elective caesarean section, Group ECS (n = 10); caesarean section concurrently with colic surgery, Group CCS (n = 8); assisted vaginal delivery, Group AVD (n = 22); and controlled vaginal delivery under general anaesthesia, Group CVD (n = 28). Survival rate in all mares that had caesarean section, excluding Group CCS, was 88% (51/58). All mares in Group ECS survived and Group CCS had the lowest survival rate (38%). In 98 mares with dystocia, Groups DCS (15%) and AVD (14%) had significantly lower (P or = 3) were recorded in 6 mares in Group CVD but not in the other groups. Of the 102 foals delivered from 98 mares with dystocia, 11 (11%) were alive at delivery and 5 (5%) survived to discharge. Survival rate for foals was 38% in Group CCS, and 90% in Group ECS. Under conditions similar to those in this study, it is calculated that caesarean section is preferable to CVD if dystocia is protracted and great difficulty and trauma is involved, even if CVD allows delivery of the foal.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 1999-07-13 PubMed ID: 10402132DOI: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03173.xGoogle Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Comparative Study
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research article explores the mortality rate and complications related to different methods of delivery in mares; caesarean section and assisted vaginal delivery. Based on the study, the authors concluded that caesarean section might be more preferable compared to controlled vaginal delivery especially if dystocia is protracted and significant difficulty and trauma are involved.

Study Method and Participant Groups

  • The scientists investigated data from 116 mares at two university hospitals.
  • These mares were split into five groups: Group DCS (dystocia corrected by caesarean section), Group ECS (elective caesarean section), Group CCS (caesarean section alongside colic surgery), Group AVD (assisted vaginal delivery), and Group CVD (controlled vaginal delivery under general anaesthesia).

Key Findings

  • The summary of the results showed 88% survival rate in mares that had a caesarean section (excluding Group CCS) with the highest survival rate observed in Group ECS (100%).
  • Group CCS had the lowest survival rate at 38%. Of the 98 mares with dystocia, Group DCS (15%) and AVD (14%) had substantially lower mortality rates than Group CVD (29%).
  • The length of dystocia was similar across all groups. However, it was found that the placenta was retained longer following an elective caesarean section compared to an assisted vaginal delivery. This occurred in 75 out of the 116 mares (65%).
  • Multiple complications (three or more) were only observed in Group CVD and not in the other groups.

Foal Survival

  • From the 102 foals that were delivered from the 98 mares with dystocia, only 11 (11%) were alive at delivery, and 5 (5%) survived to discharge.
  • Regarding the survival rates for the foals, Group CCS had a survival rate of 38%, while Group ECS had a survival rate of 90%.

Conclusion

  • In circumstances identical to the ones of this study, the results suggest that a caesarean section might be a better choice in comparison to a controlled vaginal delivery, particularly if dystocia lasts longer and involves significant trauma, even if the controlled vaginal delivery allows for the successful delivery of the foal.

Cite This Article

APA
Freeman DE, Hungerford LL, Schaeffer D, Lock TF, Sertich PL, Baker GJ, Vaala WE, Johnston JK. (1999). Caesarean section and other methods for assisted delivery: comparison of effects on mare mortality and complications. Equine Vet J, 31(3), 203-207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03173.x

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 0425-1644
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 31
Issue: 3
Pages: 203-207

Researcher Affiliations

Freeman, D E
  • University of Illinois, College of Veterinary Medicine, Urbana 61802, USA.
Hungerford, L L
    Schaeffer, D
      Lock, T F
        Sertich, P L
          Baker, G J
            Vaala, W E
              Johnston, J K

                MeSH Terms

                • Anesthesia, General / mortality
                • Anesthesia, General / veterinary
                • Animals
                • Cesarean Section / adverse effects
                • Cesarean Section / mortality
                • Cesarean Section / veterinary
                • Delivery, Obstetric / adverse effects
                • Delivery, Obstetric / methods
                • Delivery, Obstetric / veterinary
                • Dystocia / mortality
                • Dystocia / surgery
                • Dystocia / therapy
                • Dystocia / veterinary
                • Female
                • Horse Diseases / surgery
                • Horse Diseases / therapy
                • Horses
                • Obstetric Labor Complications / etiology
                • Obstetric Labor Complications / mortality
                • Obstetric Labor Complications / veterinary
                • Placenta, Retained / etiology
                • Placenta, Retained / veterinary
                • Postoperative Complications / etiology
                • Postoperative Complications / mortality
                • Postoperative Complications / veterinary
                • Pregnancy
                • Survival Rate

                Citations

                This article has been cited 6 times.
                1. Lanci A, Perina F, Donadoni A, Castagnetti C, Mariella J. Dystocia in the Standardbred Mare: A Retrospective Study from 2004 to 2020. Animals (Basel) 2022 Jun 8;12(12).
                  doi: 10.3390/ani12121486pubmed: 35739823google scholar: lookup
                2. Ninu AR, Saxena AC, Sivanarayanan TB, Remya V, Binsila BK, Maiti SK, Zama MM. Caesarean in mare by Marcenac incision under local anaesthesia. Iran J Vet Res 2015 Winter;16(1):117-9.
                  pubmed: 27175164
                3. Rioja E, Cernicchiaro N, Costa MC, Valverde A. Perioperative risk factors for mortality and length of hospitalization in mares with dystocia undergoing general anesthesia: a retrospective study. Can Vet J 2012 May;53(5):502-10.
                  pubmed: 23115362
                4. Merari A, Fielding L. Retrospective Evaluation of Dystocia in Miniature Equids: 78 Cases (2002-2023). J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio) 2025 Jul-Aug;35(4):386-391.
                  doi: 10.1111/vec.70014pubmed: 40838371google scholar: lookup
                5. de la Rebière de Pouyade G, Binard M, Deleuze S, Ponthier J. Survey on outcomes of emergency standing caesarean section in equids. Front Vet Sci 2025;12:1548978.
                  doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1548978pubmed: 40343373google scholar: lookup
                6. Ellerbrock M, Krohn J, Büttner K, Wehrend A. Isolated and multiple causes of equine dystocia. Acta Vet Scand 2024 Oct 11;66(1):55.
                  doi: 10.1186/s13028-024-00772-8pubmed: 39394153google scholar: lookup
                Subscribe to our newsletter
                Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.