Recumbency decreases mare and foal survival following in-hospital dystocia management.
Authors: Roe Heather, Macpherson Margo, Denagamage Thomas, Hopper Scott, Woodie Brett, Embertson Rolf
Journal: Equine veterinary journal
Summary
# Editorial Summary: Recumbency as a Critical Prognostic Factor in Equine Dystocia Recumbency at hospital admission significantly worsens survival outcomes for both mares and foals following dystocia management, according to a 23-year retrospective analysis of 1,079 cases at Rood and Riddle Equine Hospital. Ambulatory mares presented odds of survival nearly seven times higher than recumbent mares (90.5% vs substantially lower, OR 6.93, p<0.001), whilst foals born to ambulatory mares faced odds of survival 22.7 times greater than those from recumbent dams (p=0.002). The research examined mare signalment, ambulation status and post-dystocia fertility records, with foal survival markedly depressed at 37.3% overall, demonstrating the profound impact of maternal presentation on neonatal outcomes. Notably, surviving mares that had been recumbent showed comparable fertility within three years post-resolution to their ambulatory counterparts, suggesting that recumbency primarily compromises acute survival rather than long-term reproductive viability. These findings underscore the critical importance of early recognition and prompt intervention in dystocia cases, as the mare's ability to remain weight-bearing at admission emerges as a powerful independent predictor of both her own survival and foal viability.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Recumbency at admission for dystocia is a major negative prognostic indicator for both mare and foal survival—prioritize rapid transport and early intervention for non-ambulatory mares
- •Foal prognosis is substantially worse when the dam is recumbent, suggesting maternal systemic compromise significantly impacts foal viability
- •Surviving mares can return to normal reproductive function regardless of ambulation status during dystocia, so don't assume recumbent mares will be permanently subfertile
Key Findings
- •Ambulatory mares had significantly higher survival rates (90.5%) compared to recumbent mares, with an odds ratio of 6.93 (p<0.001)
- •Foals born to ambulatory mares had 22.7 times higher odds of survival compared to foals from recumbent mares (p=0.002)
- •Overall foal survival rate was only 37.3% despite dystocia management in hospital setting
- •Subsequent fertility in surviving Thoroughbred mares was not significantly different between ambulatory and recumbent groups within 3 years post-dystocia