Efficacy of thermal cautery for intermittent dorsal displacement of the soft palate as compared to conservatively treated horses: results from 78 treadmill diagnosed horses.

The research paper studies and compares the effectiveness of thermal cautery surgery and conservative treatment in racehorses diagnosed with idiopathic intermittent dorsal displacement of the soft palate (DDSP). According to the study results, both treatments improved racing performance, but a higher percentage of conservatively treated horses showed improved performance compared to those that underwent thermal cautery.

Objectives

• The main objective of this study was to assess and compare two different treatment methods for racehorses diagnosed with idiopathic intermittent DDSP, a condition that can impact the horse’s performance. The treatments studied were thermal cautery surgery and conservative treatment.

Methods

• The study used race records from Thoroughbred racehorses definitively diagnosed with DDSP through high-speed treadmill endoscopy.
• The researchers then measured the effectiveness of the treatments by comparing the horses’ racing performance pre and post-treatment, using the prize money won as the metric for performance.

Results

• The study included 48 horses that underwent thermal cautery and 30 horses which received conservative treatment.
• It was found that earnings significantly fell in the race prior to diagnosis for both groups.
• Between 90 to 96% of the horses returned to racing after treatment.
• Post-treatment, 53% of the conservatively treated horses showed improved performance compared to 36% of the thermal cautery group.

Conclusions

• Based on the results, a higher proportion of conservatively treated horses improved their performance compared to those treated with thermal cautery surgery.
• The authors concluded that thermal cautery appears less effective than other surgical procedures previously studied for treating DDSP.
• However, it was noted that the comparison of the two treatment methods should be interpreted with caution because the study was not randomized, resulting in baseline variability between groups.