FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Aust Vet J / Imaging of the equine abdomen using point of care ultrasound...
Australian veterinary journal2026; doi: 10.1111/avj.70068

Imaging of the equine abdomen using point of care ultrasound (POCUS): Effects of sedation on intestinal motility in horses.

Abstract: Point of care ultrasonographic (POCUS) assessment of the equine abdomen is now readily available to the equine practitioner using hand-held ultrasound transducers. Commonly used medications may alter the sonographic appearance or function of the small intestine, caecum or colon. Objective: To demonstrate qualitative and quantitative effects of xylazine sedation on intestinal motility of healthy horses using hand-held, wi-fi ultrasound transducers and validate POCUS methodology by determination of intra- and interobserver agreement. Methods: Double-blind cross-over study of eight healthy horses using hand-held, wi-fi ultrasound transducers to determine the effects of sedation on intestinal motility in comparison with administration of a placebo (saline). Motility was independently assessed by three observers using deidentified videos obtained using hand-held, wi-fi ultrasound transducers. Agreement was assessed by determination of intraclass correlation coefficient (number of duodenal contractions) and weighted kappa statistic for motility grades. Results: Sedation was associated with fewer duodenal contractions (median 0.5, range 0 to 2) after sedation, compared with administration of saline (median 4, range 3 to 5, p < 0.001). Large colon and composite motility grades were also reduced (median 4.5, range 2 to 6 after sedation; median 10, range 7 to 12, after saline, p = 0.005), and qualitative changes were evident in the sonographic appearance of jejunal loops in six of eight horses. Interobserver agreement was moderate to good, and intraobserver agreement was good to excellent. Conclusions: POCUS proved to be an effective tool to recognise qualitative and quantitative changes associated with sedation.
© 2026 The Author(s). Australian Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Veterinary Association.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2026-03-22 PubMed ID: 41866886DOI: 10.1111/avj.70068Google 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.

Overview

  • This study examined how sedation with xylazine affects intestinal motility in healthy horses by using hand-held, wi-fi ultrasound devices (POCUS) and assessed the reliability of this method by analyzing observer agreement.

Background and Purpose

  • Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is increasingly accessible for veterinarians working with horses, particularly for abdominal imaging.
  • Common sedatives used in horses may influence the movement and appearance of intestinal structures (small intestine, caecum, and colon) on ultrasound.
  • The study aimed to:
    • Demonstrate both qualitative (visual) and quantitative (measurable) effects of xylazine sedation on intestinal motility in horses.
    • Validate the POCUS technique by assessing consistency and reliability between different observers (interobserver) and within the same observer over time (intraobserver).

Methods

  • Study design:
    • Double-blind cross-over design to minimize bias.
    • Eight healthy horses were included.
    • Each horse received both xylazine sedation and saline placebo on different occasions.
  • Imaging:
    • Used hand-held, wi-fi-enabled ultrasound transducers for abdominal imaging.
    • Videos of the intestines were recorded before and after administration of sedation or placebo.
  • Motility Assessment:
    • Three independent observers assessed intestinal motility from deidentified videos.
    • Two measures were used:
      • Quantitative: Number of duodenal contractions.
      • Qualitative: Graded motility scoring for large colon and composite intestinal regions.
  • Statistical analysis:
    • Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to measure agreement for number of duodenal contractions.
    • Weighted kappa statistics for motility grade agreement.
    • Comparative statistics to assess differences between sedation and placebo conditions.

Results

  • Effect of sedation on intestinal motility:
    • Duodenal contractions were significantly decreased after sedation (median 0.5 contractions) compared to saline (median 4 contractions), indicating reduced small intestinal motility.
    • Large colon and composite motility scores were similarly reduced after sedation (median 4.5) compared to saline (median 10), showing sedation suppresses motility across intestinal regions.
    • Visual changes were noted in the appearance of jejunal loops in six out of eight horses under sedation, indicating qualitative alterations in the ultrasound image.
  • Observer agreement:
    • Interobserver agreement (between different observers) was moderate to good, suggesting consistent ratings across observers.
    • Intraobserver agreement (consistency within the same observer) was good to excellent, indicating reproducible measurements over time.
    • This validates that POCUS assessments are reliable for evaluating intestinal motility in horses.

Conclusions and Implications

  • Point of care ultrasound is an effective tool for identifying both qualitative and quantitative changes in intestinal motility caused by sedation in horses.
  • Using hand-held, wireless ultrasound devices enables practical and reliable assessment in clinical or field settings.
  • Veterinarians should consider the effects of sedatives like xylazine on intestinal motility and sonographic appearance when interpreting POCUS findings.
  • The demonstrated observer agreement supports the use of POCUS as a consistent method for abdominal evaluation in equine practice.

Cite This Article

APA
Freccero F, Padalino B, Carstens A, Raidal SL. (2026). Imaging of the equine abdomen using point of care ultrasound (POCUS): Effects of sedation on intestinal motility in horses. Aust Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1111/avj.70068

Publication

Australian veterinary journal
ISSN: 1751-0813
NlmUniqueID: 0370616
Country: England
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Freccero, F
  • Department of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Padalino, B
  • Faculty of Science and Engineering, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Carstens, A
  • School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
Raidal, S L
  • School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.

References

This article includes 38 references
  1. Corrie S, Chapman K, Schofield I. Preliminary study to evaluate the use of fast abdominal ultrasonography of horses with colic in first opinion ambulatory practice. Equine Vet Educ 2024;36:571–578.
  2. Norman TE. Maximising the use of point‐of‐care ultrasonography of the adult equine abdomen and thorax. Equine Vet Educ 2024;36:597–602.
  3. Williams S, Cooper J, Freeman S. Evaluation of normal findings using a detailed and focused technique for transcutaneous abdominal ultrasonography in the horse. BMC Vet Res 2014;10(Suppl 1):S5.
  4. Busoni V, De Busscher V, Lopez D. Evaluation of a protocol for fast localised abdominal sonography of horses (FLASH) admitted for colic. Vet J 2011;188:77–82.
  5. VanderBroek AR, Reef VB, Aitken MR. Assessing gastrointestinal motility in healthy horses comparing auscultation, ultrasonography and an acoustic gastrointestinal surveillance biosensor: a randomised, blinded, controlled crossover proof of principle study. Equine Vet J 2019;51:246–251.
  6. Mitchell CF, Malone ED, Sage AM. Evaluation of gastrointestinal activity patterns in healthy horses using B mode and Doppler ultrasonography. Can Vet J 2005;46:134–140.
  7. Freeman SL, England GC. Effect of romifidine on gastrointestinal motility, assessed by transrectal ultrasonography. Equine Vet J 2001;33:570–576.
  8. Beder NA, Mourad AA, Aly MA. Ultrasonographic evaluation of the effects of the administration of neostigmine and metoclopramide on duodenal, cecal, and colonic contractility in Arabian horses: a comparative study. Vet World 2020;13:2447–2451.
  9. Gomaa N, Uhlig A, Schusser GF. Effect of Buscopan compositum on the motility of the duodenum, cecum and left ventral colon in healthy conscious horses. Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr 2011;124:168–174.
  10. Haugaard SL, McGovern KF, Tallon R. Ultrasonographic assessment of small intestinal motility following hyoscine butylbromide administration in horses: a pilot study. J Equine Vet Sci 2023;128:104878.
  11. Epstein KL, Hall MD. Effect of nasogastric tube placement, manipulation, and fluid administration on transcutaneous ultrasound visualization and assessment of stomach position in healthy unfed and fed horses. Animals 2022;12:3433.
  12. Lores M, Stryhn H, McDuffee L. Transcutaneous ultrasonographic evaluation of gastric distension with fluid in horses. Am J Vet Res 2007;68:153–157.
  13. Kihurani DO, Carstens A, Saulez MN. Transcutaneous ultrasonographic evaluation of the air‐filled equine stomach and duodenum following gastroscopy. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2009;50:429–435.
  14. Sutton DG, Preston T, Christley RM. The effects of xylazine, detomidine, acepromazine and butorphanol on equine solid phase gastric emptying rate. Equine Vet J 2002;34:486–492.
  15. Merritt AM, Burrow JA, Hartless CS. Effect of xylazine, detomidine, and a combination of xylazine and butorphanol on equine duodenal motility. Am J Vet Res 1998;59:619–623.
  16. Elfenbein JR, Sanchez LC, Robertson SA. Effect of detomidine on visceral and somatic nociception and duodenal motility in conscious adult horses.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2009;36:162–172.
  17. Roger T, Ruckebusch Y. Colonic alpha 2‐adrenoceptor‐mediated responses in the pony.. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1987;10:310–318.
  18. Munsterman AS, Dias Moreira AS, Kottwitz J. Evaluation of the effects of detomidine on equine myoelectrical activity using electrointestinography.. J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2025;35:120–130.
  19. Adams SB, Lamar CH, Masty J. Motility of the distal portion of the jejunum and pelvic flexure in ponies: effects of six drugs.. Am J Vet Res 1984;45:795–799.
  20. Laus F, Fratini M, Paggi E. Effects of single‐dose prucalopride on intestinal hypomotility in horses: preliminary observations.. Sci Rep 2017;7:41526.
  21. Guzmán JFC, Gontijo AS, Melgaço ES. Analgesic and gastrointestinal effects of morphine in equines.. Animals 2025;15:571.
  22. Delvescovo B, Chevalier JM, Campoy L. Ultrasound‐guided celiac plexus block increases intestinal motility in normal horses.. Am J Vet Res 2025;86.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.24.11.0328google scholar: lookup
  23. Salciccia A, Gougnard A, Grulke S. Gastrointestinal effects of general anaesthesia in horses undergoing non abdominal surgery: focus on the clinical parameters and ultrasonographic images.. Res Vet Sci 2019;124:123–128.
  24. Cuevas‐Ramos G, Domenech L, Prades M. Small intestine ultrasound findings on horses following exploratory laparotomy, can we predict postoperative reflux?. Animals 2019;9:1106.
  25. Lawson AL, Knowles EJ, Sherlock CE. Equine duodenal motility as a predictor of reflux and survival following colic surgery.. Equine Vet Educ 2017;29:29.
  26. Kirberger RM, Berg JS, Gottschalk RD. Duodenal ultrasonography in the normal adult horse.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1995;36:50–56.
  27. de Vries A, Pakkanen SA, Raekallio MR. Clinical effects and pharmacokinetic variables of romifidine and the peripheral α(2) ‐adrenoceptor antagonist MK‐467 in horses.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2016;43:599–610.
  28. Hallman I, Tapio H, Raekallio M. Effect of constant rate infusion of detomidine with and without vatinoxan on blood glucose and insulin concentrations in horses.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2024;51:144–151.
  29. Drake A, Franklin N, Schrock JW. Auscultation of bowel sounds and ultrasound of peristalsis are neither compartmentalized nor correlated.. Cureus 2021;13:e14982.
  30. Felder S, Margel D, Murrell Z. Usefulness of bowel sound auscultation: a prospective evaluation.. J Surg Educ 2014;71:768–773.
  31. Priyadarshi A, Tracy M, Kothari P. Comparison of simultaneous auscultation and ultrasound for clinical assessment of bowel peristalsis in neonates.. Front Pediatr 2023;11:1173332.
  32. Bithell S, Habershon‐Butcher JL, Bowen IM. Repeatability and reproducibility of transabdominal ultrasonographic intestinal wall thickness measurements in thoroughbred hores.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2010;51:647–651.
  33. Lawson AL, Sherlock CE, Mair TS. Equine duodenal motility, assessed by ultrasonography, as a predictor of reflux and survival following colic surgery.. Equine Vet Educ 2021;33:84–89.
  34. Ehrhardt EE, Lowe JE. Observer variation in equine abdominal auscultation.. Equine Vet J 1990;22(3):182–185.
  35. Durup‐Dickenson M, Christensen MK, Gade J. Abdominal auscultation does not provide clear clinical diagnoses.. Dan Med J 2013;60(5):A4620.
  36. Bassotti G, Maconi G. Intestinal ultrasound, an underutilized tool for assessing colonic motility.. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2024;326:G1–G2.
  37. Goodsall TM, An YK, Andrews JM. Reliability of intestinal ultrasound for evaluating Crohn's disease activity using point‐of‐care and central reading.. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025;23(9):1600–1611.
  38. Mihnovits V, Reintam Blaser A, Gualdi T. Gastrointestinal ultrasound in the critically ill: a narrative review and a proposal for a protocol.. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2024;48:895–905.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,132 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.