Discussion on Fecal testing question
Use the navigation bar above to access articles and more discussions on this topic.
| Author |
Message |
    
Kimberly J. Thomas
Member
Username: kjthoma
Post Number: 15
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, Feb 14, 2007 - 9:46 am: |   |
I posted on this forum a few months ago when my horse had it's second colic in about three months. At the time, we thot it could be her eating really fast, but decided that if it kept happening to get her scoped.
Has happened twice more in the last 2 months, so we took her in for scoping. FWIW - all of the colics have been 'spasmodic' and have required both banamine and buscopan. The one time she didn't have buscopan she got pretty bad.
NADA in the stomach, bloodwork normal.
Vet checked twice for sand. One check he said that she had a 'pretty fair sand load', second check was negative for sand. Parasites were negative.
He's recommending a purge w/ vet-lax, putting her out w/ a muzzle (small paddocks - mostly dirt - she tries to eat anyway)...and possibly a power-pack because 'we just don't know'.
If the issue is sand, I'm thinking of maybe moving her to where there would be more grass and putting a muzzle on her on grass (air-fern).
So the underlying question - if you have 2 fecals, one of which shows sand and one of which doesn't - is the one WITH sand more significant? |
Robert N. Oglesby DVM
Moderator
Username: dro
Post Number: 17770
Registered: 1-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, Feb 15, 2007 - 6:59 am: | |
Hello Kimberly,
I am afraid there is not enough information to answer which is more significant but if you discount the positive result, you do so at the risk of your horse's health.
DrO |
Kimberly J. Thomas
Member
Username: kjthoma
Post Number: 16
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, Feb 15, 2007 - 7:01 am: | |
Thanks, Dr. O....that's pretty much what I was wondering. The attending vet said 'not conclusive due to the second test'....so I wasn't really sure how to take that! |
