Comparison of outcomes following treatment of septic calcaneal bursitis by needle or bursoscopic lavage: A retrospective study of 29 horses

Abstract

SummarySepsis of the calcaneal bursae (CB) presents significant treatment challenges with limited clinical data available in the literature. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to assess the clinical outcomes associated with CB lavage using either a through‐and‐through needle or bursoscopic technique. Clinical records of 29 horses treated for septic calcaneal bursitis using either technique between 2005 and 2019 were reviewed. Fisher’s exact test was used to assess statistical significance between first surgical technique and success at first surgery (i.e. not requiring >1 lavage), survival to discharge and return to work (RTW). Bursoscopy was performed in 13/29 (44.8%) cases, and needle lavage in 16/29 (55.2%). In the needle group, 12 (75%) horses were discharged following the first surgery. Four had repeat interventions; two (12.5%) had needle lavage and two (12.5%) had bursoscopy. Of the two horses to have repeat needle lavage, one was subjected to euthanasia and one discharged, and of the two that underwent bursoscopy, one was discharged and one received a third bursoscopy prior to discharge. In the bursoscopy group, seven (53.8%) were discharged and three (23.1%) were subjected to euthanasia following the first surgery. Three (23.1%) received a second bursoscopic lavage with one discharged, one subjected to euthanasia and one having a third bursoscopic lavage prior to discharge. Overall, 18/24 (75%) followed up cases RTW, 10 (55.5%) from the needle group, eight (44.4%) the bursoscopy group. No statistically significant differences between first surgical technique used and success at first surgery (no subsequent lavage(s) required), survival to discharge or return to work were detected. The main limitations of this study are that it is a retrospective study, has a small population with limited statistical power and potential selection bias. No statistically significant differences existed between the outcomes of the two techniques, contrary to the belief that bursoscopic lavage is superior. Larger, multicentred studies, with greater statistical power are required to further assess this relationship.