FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Equine veterinary journal2026; doi: 10.1002/evj.70190

Owner satisfaction and animal welfare after bilateral enucleation in horses.

Abstract: Bilateral enucleation in horses represents a challenging decision for owners, undertaken to relieve chronic, untreatable ocular pain. Emotional distress and uncertainty regarding postoperative welfare often lead to euthanasia instead of surgery. Objective: To evaluate owner perceptions of equine quality of life before and after bilateral enucleation, and to assess satisfaction with the procedure. Methods: Retrospective case series. Methods: Medical records from 21 horses that underwent bilateral enucleation between 2016 and 2024 were reviewed. Owners completed a structured survey assessing satisfaction, pain, activity, tactile sensitivity, and overall well-being before and after surgery. Results: The mean age at the time of the second or bilateral enucleation was 20.6 ± 4.1 years (range: 12-26 years), with Appaloosa (62%) predominating. Equine recurrent uveitis accounted for 95% of cases. Owners reported improvements in all assessed welfare-related parameters following surgery. The median satisfaction score was 5/5 (IQR 4-5, range 4-5), and the median likelihood to recommend the procedure was 4/5 (IQR 4-5, range 3-5). All horses were reported by their owners to show improved quality of life, with most of them returning to their previous levels of activity. Conclusions: Retrospective design, reliance on owner-reported data-which may be subject to recall and selection biases-a relatively small sample size, and the absence of objective clinical follow-up to confirm the reported outcomes. Conclusions: Bilateral enucleation was associated with owner-reported improvements in equine welfare and high owner satisfaction, suggesting it may represent a viable alternative to euthanasia in horses with chronic ocular pain.
© 2026 EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2026-05-21 PubMed ID: 42167789DOI: 10.1002/evj.70190Google 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 investigated how horse owners perceive the quality of life and welfare of horses before and after undergoing bilateral enucleation (the surgical removal of both eyes) and assessed their satisfaction with the procedure.
  • The research found that owners generally reported improvements in their horses’ welfare and expressed high satisfaction with the surgery, indicating bilateral enucleation may be a reasonable alternative to euthanasia for horses suffering from chronic eye pain.

Background and Objective

  • Bilateral enucleation in horses is a major surgical decision often considered only when horses have chronic, untreatable eye pain.
  • Owners often face emotional distress and uncertainty about the horse’s welfare after surgery, leading some to choose euthanasia rather than surgery.
  • The study aimed to evaluate owner perceptions of the horse’s quality of life and welfare before and after the surgery, as well as to assess owner satisfaction with the surgical outcome.

Study Design and Methods

  • The research was a retrospective case series analyzing medical records from 21 horses that had bilateral enucleation performed between 2016 and 2024.
  • These horses were primarily older (average age ~20.6 years) with the majority being Appaloosas (62%).
  • Most cases (95%) involved equine recurrent uveitis, a painful eye condition.
  • Owners completed a structured questionnaire focusing on several aspects before and after surgery, including:
    • Satisfaction with the procedure
    • Horse pain levels
    • Activity levels
    • Tactile sensitivity
    • Overall well-being

Key Findings

  • Owners reported improvements in all welfare-related factors after surgery, indicating reduced pain and better quality of life.
  • The median owner satisfaction with the procedure was very high (5 out of 5). The range was tight, indicating consistently positive responses.
  • Likelihood to recommend the surgery to others was also high (median score of 4 out of 5).
  • All horses were reported by their owners to have better quality of life after surgery.
  • Most horses returned to their prior activity levels, suggesting good functional recovery post-surgery.

Limitations

  • The study was retrospective, which inherently limits the strength of its conclusions.
  • Data relied heavily on owners’ recall and subjective reporting, which may be biased or inaccurate.
  • Small sample size (only 21 horses) limits generalizability to all horses undergoing this procedure.
  • Lack of objective clinical follow-up data to independently verify owner-reported outcomes.

Conclusions and Implications

  • The findings suggest bilateral enucleation can significantly improve welfare in horses suffering from chronic ocular pain.
  • Owners were highly satisfied with the surgery and noticed positive changes in their horses’ well-being.
  • These results support the consideration of bilateral enucleation as a valid alternative to euthanasia for horses with untreatable eye pain.
  • Veterinarians and owners should weigh these benefits against the limitations and emotional difficulties when making treatment decisions.

Cite This Article

APA
Gasco J, Sauvage A, Monclin SJ, Narinx F. (2026). Owner satisfaction and animal welfare after bilateral enucleation in horses. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1002/evj.70190

Publication

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

Researcher Affiliations

Gasco, Jade
  • Ophthalmology Department, Hospital Veterinari Canis, Girona, Spain.
Sauvage, Aurélie
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, Companion and Equine Animals, Ophthalmology, Veterinary Teaching Hospital of the University of Liège, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Monclin, Sébastien J
  • Ophthalmology Department, Centre Vétérinaire de Spécialistes Caladrius, Wavre, Belgium.
Narinx, Florine
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, Companion and Equine Animals, Ophthalmology, Veterinary Teaching Hospital of the University of Liège, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

References

This article includes 31 references
  1. Huppes T, Hermans H, Ensink JM. A retrospective analysis of the risk factors for surgical site infections and long‐term follow‐up after transpalpebral enucleation in horses.. BMC Vet Res 2017;13(1):2–8.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1069-5google scholar: lookup
  2. Wright K, Ireland JL, Rendle DI. A multicentre study of long‐term follow‐up and owner satisfaction following enucleation in horses.. Equine Vet J 2017;50(2):186–191.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12743google scholar: lookup
  3. Getman M. Evaluation of recovery from anesthesia in horses after enucleation compared with other surgical procedures.. Proc Am Assoc Equine Pract 2009;55:379.
  4. Utter ME, Wotman KL, Covert KR. Return to work following unilateral enucleation in 34 horses (2000–2008).. Equine Vet J 2010;42(2):156–160.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409x479577google scholar: lookup
  5. Kingsley NB, Sandmeyer L, Bellone RR. A review of investigated risk factors for developing equine recurrent uveitis.. Vet Ophthalmol 2022;26:87–95.
    doi: 10.1111/vop.13002google scholar: lookup
  6. Myrna KE. Neuro‐ophthalmology in the horse.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2017;33(3):541–549.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2017.07.001google scholar: lookup
  7. De Grauw JC, Van Loon JPAM. Systematic pain assessment in horses.. Vet J 2016;209:14–22.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.07.030google scholar: lookup
  8. Van Loon JPAM, Van Dierendonck MC. Objective pain assessment in horses (2014–2018).. Vet J 2018;242:1–7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.10.001google scholar: lookup
  9. Clough H, Roshier M, England G, Burford J, Freeman S. Qualitative study of the influence of horse–owner relationship during some key events within a horse's lifetime.. Vet Rec 2021;188(6):e79.
    doi: 10.1002/vetr.79google scholar: lookup
  10. Hamzianpour N, Smith K, Dawson C, Rhodes M. Bilateral enucleation in dogs: a review of owner perceptions and satisfaction.. Vet Ophthalmol 2019;22(5):566–576.
    doi: 10.1111/vop.12623google scholar: lookup
  11. Dalla Costa E, Minero M, Lebelt D, Stucke D, Canali E, Leach M. Development of the Horse Grimace Scale (HGS) as a pain assessment tool in horses undergoing routine castration.. PLoS One 2014;9(3):e92281.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092281google scholar: lookup
  12. Pritchett LC, Ulibarri C, Roberts MC, Schneider RK, Sellon DC. Identification of potential physiological and behavioral indicators of postoperative pain in horses after exploratory celiotomy for colic.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003;80(1):31–43.
    doi: 10.1016/s0168-1591(02)00205-8google scholar: lookup
  13. Van Loon JPAM, Van Dierendonck MC. Monitoring acute equine visceral pain with the Equine Utrecht University Scale for Composite Pain Assessment (EQUUS‐COMPASS) and the Equine Utrecht University Scale for Facial Assessment of Pain (EQUUS‐FAP): a scale‐construction study.. Vet J 2015;206(3):356–364.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.08.023google scholar: lookup
  14. Ortolani F, Scilimati N, Gialletti R, Menchetti L, Nannarone S. Development and preliminary validation of a pain scale for ophthalmic pain in horses: the Equine Ophthalmic Pain Scale (EOPS).. Vet J 2021;278:105774.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2021.105774google scholar: lookup
  15. Nannarone S, Ortolani F, Scilimati N, Gialletti R, Menchetti L. Refinement and revalidation of the Equine Ophthalmic Pain Scale: R‐EOPS, a new scale for ocular pain assessment in horses.. Vet J 2024;299:106079.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2024.106079google scholar: lookup
  16. Price J, Welsh EM, Waran NK. Preliminary evaluation of a behaviour‐based system for assessment of postoperative pain in horses following arthroscopic surgery. Vet Anaesth Analg 2003;30(3):124–137.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1467-2995.2003.00139.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  17. Jodzio D, DeNotta S, Plummer C, Sanchez C. Pain scoring systems in hospitalized horses with ocular disease. J Vet Intern Med 2023;37:389–395.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.16933google scholar: lookup
  18. Bussières G, Jacques C, Lainay O, Beauchamp G, Leblond A, Cadoré JL. Development of a composite orthopaedic pain scale in horses. Res Vet Sci 2008;85(2):294–306.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2007.10.011google scholar: lookup
  19. Gleerup KB, Forkman B, Lindegaard C, Andersen PH. An equine pain face. Vet Anaesth Analg 2015;42(1):103–114.
    doi: 10.1111/vaa.12212google scholar: lookup
  20. Taffarel MO, Luna SPL, de Oliveira FA, Cardoso GS, Alonso JDM, Pantoja JC. Refinement and partial validation of the UNESP‐Botucatu multidimensional composite pain scale for assessing postoperative pain in horses. BMC Vet Res 2015;11:83.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-015-0395-8google scholar: lookup
  21. Van Loon JPAM, Macri L. Objective assessment of chronic pain in horses using the Horse Chronic Pain Scale (HCPS): a scale‐construction study. Animals (Basel) 2021;11(6):1826.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11061826google scholar: lookup
  22. Zisopoulou MS, Krisová S. Bilateral enucleation instead of euthanasia in a blind mare. Anim Prot Welfare 2021;48:312–317.
  23. Gerding JC, Gilger BC. Prognosis and impact of equine recurrent uveitis. Equine Vet J 2015;48(3):290–298.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12451google scholar: lookup
  24. Sandmeyer LS, Bauer BS, Feng CX, Grahn BH. Equine recurrent uveitis in western Canadian prairie provinces: a retrospective study (2002–2015). Can Vet J 2017;58(7):717–722.
  25. Long M, Dürnberger C, Jenner F, Kelemen Z, Auer U, Grimm H. Quality of life within horse welfare assessment tools: informing decisions for chronically ill and geriatric horses. Animals (Basel) 2022;12(14):1822.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12141822google scholar: lookup
  26. Dwyer AE. Management of blind horses. In: Gilger BC, editor. Equine ophthalmology. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2022. p. 798–818.
  27. Dwyer A. Hello darkness my old friend: management of blind horses. Equine Vet Educ 2020;32:1–4.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13387google scholar: lookup
  28. Menzies‐Gow NJ. Equine pituitary pars intermedia dysfunction. Vet Sci 2025;12(8):780.
    doi: 10.3390/vetsci12080780google scholar: lookup
  29. Cornell KK, Kopcha M. Client–veterinarian communication: skills for client‐centered dialogue and shared decision making. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2007;37(1):37–47.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2006.10.005google scholar: lookup
  30. Cremer J, Ross J, Paranjape V. Complications in equine anesthesia. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2025;41:473–493.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2025.08.002google scholar: lookup
  31. Senior JM. Morbidity, mortality and risk of general anesthesia in horses. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2013;29:1–18.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2012.11.007google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 106,245 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.