FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Experimental comparison of caudal wedge ostectomy to cranial...
Equine veterinary journal2025; doi: 10.1111/evj.14498

Experimental comparison of caudal wedge ostectomy to cranial wedge ostectomy for surgical treatment of overriding/impinging spinous processes in horses.

Abstract: Caudal wedge ostectomy has not been investigated for overriding or impinging spinous processes (SPs). Objective: To establish the feasibility of caudal wedge ostectomy and compare measures of surgical trauma and error between hypothetical caudal and cranial wedge ostectomies on SPs of different inclinations. Methods: Experimental, method comparison study. Methods: Computed tomography and caudal wedge ostectomy surgery were performed on four cadavers. Observations, technical difficulties, and surgical errors were recorded. Radiographs from 67 horses with overriding/impinging SPs were reviewed. Hypothetical 'ideal' caudal and cranial wedge ostectomies, and 'error' ostectomies 12° from ideal, were drawn at sites of impingement. Ostectomy area/SP width, ostectomy length/SP width, absolute difference of exit angles (angle ostectomy exits the SP) from 90°, and number of error ostectomies failing to exit the SP (never-ending-cuts [NEC]) were calculated. Continuous variables were compared between techniques in caudally and cranially inclined SP groups using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Proportions of NEC were compared using McNemar's tests. Results: No surgical errors were recorded with caudal wedge ostectomy. Median ostectomy area/SP width was lower for caudal versus cranial wedge ostectomy in caudally (14.32, interquartile-range [IQR] 9.72-20.34 vs. 25.57, IQR 17.74-33.06; p < 0.001) and cranially inclined SP groups (11.78, IQR 7.98-17.19 vs. 19.62, IQR 13.65-28.68; p < 0.001). Median difference in exit angles from 90° was smaller for caudal versus cranial wedge ostectomies in caudally (34.77°, IQR 26.85°-45.91° vs. 67.54°, IQR 58.13°-74.55°; p < 0.001) and cranially inclined SP groups (49.14°, IQR 35.61°-59.33° vs. 62.84°, IQR 55.34°-70.61°; p < 0.001). The proportion of NEC was lower for caudal versus cranial wedge ostectomy in caudally (37.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 29.4%-45.8%; n = 50/133 vs. 96.2%, 95% CI 93.0%-99.5%; n = 128/133; p < 0.001), but not in cranially inclined SP groups (76.8%, 95% CI 70.9%-82.7%; n = 152/198 vs. 84.3%, 95% CI 79.3%-89.4%, n = 167/198; p = 0.06). Conclusions: Potential bias drawing 'ideal' ostectomy. Conclusions: Experimentally, caudal wedge ostectomy was feasible, removed less bone, and resulted in fewer NEC in caudally inclined SPs. Further investigation of the technique is warranted.
© 2025 The Author(s). Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-03-20 PubMed ID: 40110991DOI: 10.1111/evj.14498Google 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
  • 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 study set out to assess the feasibility of caudal wedge ostectomy, a surgical technique for treating conditions related to the impingement of spinous processes in horses. The research concluded that caudal wedge ostectomy was feasible, resulted in less bone removal, and had fewer surgical errors, particularly in caudally inclined spinous processes, as compared to the cranial wedge ostectomy.

Objective and Methods used

  • The study was aimed at assessing the feasibility and efficiency of caudal wedge ostectomy relative to cranial wedge ostectomy when dealing with issues linked to the impingement of spinous processes.
  • The researchers carried out their experiments on four horse cadavers by means of computed tomography (CT) and surgical procedures. During the surgical operations, they paid attention to and recorded any surgical errors or technical difficulties encountered.

Method Comparison Study

  • The researchers carried out an analysis of radiographs obtained from 67 horses that had issues with impinging/overriding spinous processes.
  • Following this, they illustrated hypothetical instances of perfect caudal and cranial wedge ostectomies, as well as flawed ostectomies deviating from the ideal by 12°, at the sites of impingement.
  • Performing these comparisons allowed the researchers to deduce quantitative measures related to surgical trauma and error between the cranial and caudal wedge ostectomies.
  • Determined measures included; ostectomy area, SP width, ostectomy length, absolute difference of exit angles and the number of failed ostectomies.

Results of the Research

  • According to the findings, none of the caudal wedge ostectomies resulted in any surgical errors.
  • Both in caudally and cranially inclined SP groups, the median ostectomy region in relation to SP width was found to be lower in caudal wedge ostectomy than in cranial wedge ostectomy.
  • The median difference in exit angles from 90° was seen to be smaller for caudal as against cranial wedge ostectomies in both caudally and cranially inclined spinous process groups.
  • The proportion of ostectomies that failed to exit the spinous process (termed never-ending-cuts) was lower in caudal wedge ostectomy than in cranial wedge ostectomy in caudally inclined SP groups, but was found to be not significantly different in cranially inclined SP groups.

Conclusions

  • The study concluded that caudal wedge ostectomy is viable for addressing issues related to impingement of spinous processes in horses. Furthermore, during experiments, it was discovered that this surgical approach resulted in less bone removal compared to cranial wedge ostectomy.
  • Additionally, the number of ‘never-ending-cuts’, a measure of surgical errors, was also found to be lower in caudal wedge ostectomy, particularly in the case of caudally inclined spinous processes.
  • Despite acknowledging potential bias towards caudal ostectomy, the research suggests that further investigation of this technique is justified.

Cite This Article

APA
Connaughton MT, MacDonald EJ, Ireland JL, Rocchigiani G, Stack JD. (2025). Experimental comparison of caudal wedge ostectomy to cranial wedge ostectomy for surgical treatment of overriding/impinging spinous processes in horses. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14498

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Connaughton, Maurice Thomas
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, UK.
MacDonald, Eilidh Janet
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, UK.
Ireland, Jo L
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, UK.
Rocchigiani, Guido
  • Department of Veterinary Anatomy, Physiology and Pathology, University of Liverpool, Neston, UK.
Stack, John David
  • Department of Equine Clinical Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, UK.

Grant Funding

  • Gerald Leigh Charitable Trust and Beaufort Cottage Educational Trust

References

This article includes 24 references
  1. Jeffcott LB. Disorders of the thoracolumbar spine of the horse‐a survey of 443 cases.. Equine Vet J 1980;12(4):197–210.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1980.tb03427.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  2. Zimmerman M, Dyson S, Murray R. Close, impinging and overriding spinous processes in the thoracolumbar spine: the relationship between radiological and scintigraphic findings and clinical signs.. Equine Vet J 2012;44(2):178–184.
  3. Townsend HGG, Leach DH, Doige CE, Kirkaldy‐Willis WH. Relationship between spinal biomechanics and pathological changes in the equine thoracolumbar spine.. Equine Vet J 1986;18(2):107–112.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1986.tb03559.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  4. Clayton HM, Stubbs NC. Enthesophytosis and impingement of the dorsal spinous processes in the equine thoracolumbar spine.. J Equine Vet Sci 2016;47:9–15.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2016.07.015google scholar: lookup
  5. Haussler KK. Anatomy of the thoracolumbar vertebral region.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1999;15(1):13–26.
  6. Spoormakers TJP, Veraa S, Graat EAM, van Weeren PR, Brommer H. A comparative study of breed differences in the anatomical configuration of the equine vertebral column.. J Anat 2021;239(4):829–838.
    doi: 10.1111/joa.13456google scholar: lookup
  7. Walmsley JP, Pettersson H, Winberg F, McEvoy F. Impingement of the dorsal spinous processes in two hundred and fifteen horses: case selection, surgical technique and results.. Equine Vet J 2002;34(1):23–28.
    doi: 10.2746/042516402776181259google scholar: lookup
  8. Coomer RPC, McKane SA, Smith N, Vandeweerd JME. A controlled study evaluating a novel surgical treatment for kissing spines in standing sedated horses.. Vet Surg 2012;41(7):890–897.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2012.01013.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  9. Jeffcott LB, Hickman J. The treatment of horses with chronic Back pain by resecting the summits of the impinging dorsal spinous processes.. Equine Vet J 1975;7(3):115–119.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1975.tb03245.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  10. Perkins JD, Schumacher J, Kelly G, Pollock P, Harty M. Subtotal osteotomy of dorsal spinous processes performed in nine standing horses.. Vet Surg 2005;34(6):625–629.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2005.00097.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  11. Desbrosse FG, Perrin R, Launois T, Vandeweerd JME, Clegg PD. Endoscopic resection of dorsal spinous processes and interspinous ligament in ten horses.. Vet Surg 2007;36(2):149–155.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2012.00678.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  12. Jacklin BD, Minshall GJ, Wright IM. A new technique for subtotal (cranial wedge) ostectomy in the treatment of impinging/overriding spinous processes: description of technique and outcome of 25 cases.. Equine Vet J 2014;46(3):339–344.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12215google scholar: lookup
  13. Brink P. Subtotal ostectomy of impinging dorsal spinous processes in 23 standing horses.. Vet Surg 2014;43(1):95–98.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2013.12078.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  14. de Souza TC, Crowe OM, Bowles D, Poore LA, Suthers JM. Minimally invasive cranial ostectomy for the treatment of impinging dorsal spinous processes in 102 standing horses.. Vet Surg 2022;51(S1):60–68.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.13736google scholar: lookup
  15. Prisk AJ, García‐López JM. Long‐term prognosis for return to athletic function after interspinous ligament desmotomy for treatment of impinging and overriding dorsal spinous processes in horses: 71 cases (2012–2017).. Vet Surg 2019;48(7):1278–1286.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.13298google scholar: lookup
  16. Brown KA, Davidson EJ, Ortved K, Ross MW, Stefanovski D, Wulster KB. Long‐term outcome and effect of diagnostic analgesia in horses undergoing interspinous ligament desmotomy for overriding dorsal spinous processes.. Vet Surg 2020;49(3):590–599.
    doi: 10.1111/vsu.13377google scholar: lookup
  17. Rubio‐Martinez LM, Hendrickson DA. Complications in equine surgery.. Vol 59. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Inc; 2021. p. 833–842.
    doi: 10.1002/9781119190332.ch59google scholar: lookup
  18. Zimmerman M, Dyson S, Murray R. Comparison of radiographic and scintigraphic findings of the spinous processes in the equine thoracolumbar region.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2011;52(6):661–671.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2011.01845.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  19. . Statulator: an online statistical calculator. Sample size calculator for comparing two paired means.. 2014.
  20. Eriksson AR, Albrektsson T, Albrektsson B. Heat caused by drilling cortical bone: temperature measured in vivo in patients and animals.. Acta Orthop 1984;55(6):629–631.
    doi: 10.3109/17453678408992410google scholar: lookup
  21. Augustin G, Zigman T, Davila S, Udilljak T, Staroveski T, Brezak D. Cortical bone drilling and thermal osteonecrosis.. Clin Biomech 2012;27(4):313–325.
    doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.10.010google scholar: lookup
  22. Sener BC, Dergin G, Gursoy B, Kelesoglu E, Slih I. Effects of irrigation temperature on heat control in vitro at different drilling depths.. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(3):294–298.
  23. Berner D, Winter K, Brehm W, Gerlach K. Influence of head and neck position on radiographic measurement of intervertebral distances between thoracic dorsal spinous processes in clinically sound horses.. Equine Vet J 2012;44(S43):21–26.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2012.00678.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  24. Djernæs J, Vedding Nielsen J, Berg L. Effect of X‐ray beam angle and superimposition on radiographic evaluation of kissing spines syndrome.. Equine Vet J 2014;46(S46):39–40.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12267_120google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.