Navicular--is it the kiss of death? Help!!!

[cyberbay]

My 10-year old horse is diagnosed with navicular. He’s shown signs, which we’ve been now managing actively for more than a year, for 2+ years. The management was bar shoes with degree pads, and isox. It worked great.

Now, the symptoms have intensified starting this spring–we’ve managed to get him sound again, but the vet has intimated that this will be a touch and go condition, and that in the end, the navicular will win.

Help. Any suggestions for care, treatment, what to avoid, what to do? Is my horse just winding down to forced retirement?

As noted above, we’ve had him in bar shoes for a year+ and on isox for a year+. Recently, he was injected in the n.bursa and in the coffin joint, with the effects lasting 1 week. He is back on Adequan (shot a week, so far, with attempts at spacing the injections starting in a week or 2). I ride him on superior footing. He is turned out in a flat sand paddock.

Recently, with this bout of lameness, we approached the treatment by first removing the degree pads. He was sound for a week. In response, we went the other way, back to a 2-degree pad. After a week of walking in his new angles, we have done light trotting, and now the work is a tad more intense, with some bits of cantering. So far, so good.

But every day is all you get. No sense of confidence that tomorrow will be a good day.

So, any suggestions for care or future treatment? I’ve heard of a drug called Tigmet???, for foot ailments, and it’s in use by some vets here, but also phew! expensive…and eventual neurectomy…

Thanks for everything!

[Lookout]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tom Stovall, CJF:
Aren’t you the scholar who wrote, <span class=“ev_code_RED”>“There is no pressure on the navicular bone from the DDFT. In fact the more weight the horse applies to the foot the further the DDFT is pushed away from the bone…”</span>?

Given this demonstration of your vast knowledge of equid anatomy, I apparently didn’t fare to well against your willful ignorance and intellectual intransigence. On the off chance that you might consider trading your ignorance for knowledge, you might consider looking up the etiology of navicular syndrome in any college level textbook. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, that is correct and that is what happens. Have you ever tried it to see for yourself what happens? Or failing that, seen it demonstrated on the Pollitt video? Given the lack of knowledge of the etiology of navicular in a college level textbook, as well as the failure rate of the palliative attempts, that is not what I would point to as the source of accurate anatomical information.

[LMH]

Would there be any way to tone this thread down and actually give some good input without everyone getting nasty?

I personally would enjoy hearing what everyone has to say but this seems to be a thread that should be titled Beat Up the Barefooters or Fart on Farriers-neither approach makes either side very appealing.

[Lookout]

Percentages?

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tom Stovall, CJF:
In terms of numbers, I measure success (see above) one horse at a time and I’ve gotten it done often enough to make the doing of it worthwhile. To reiterate, if somebody pulls a bar shoe off one of one of my horses, performance is going to suffer. Every time.
. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lookout:
In terms of numbers how do you define success? You laughed at slb’s statistics of success as impossible. And you say you are a fan of what works. How often does it have to work to be considered a success? Half the time? More, less?

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tom Stovall, CJF:
<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Therein lies the difference between you and I and our approach to farriery. I define “success” as the application of whatever mechanical protocols will enable the horse to be both pain free and in use without deleterious effect.</span> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In terms of numbers, I measure success (see above) one horse at a time and I’ve gotten it done often enough to make the doing of it worthwhile. To reiterate, if somebody pulls a bar shoe off one of one of my horses, performance is going to suffer. Every time.

Anybody can turn horses diagnosed with navicular syndrome out in an abrasive environment and claim a high percentage of “success” - but the percentages dip precipitously when those horses come out of the pasture and go back into training.

[horse_poor]

"On the other hand, I have the utmost contempt for anyone who allows a horse to live in pain in order to adhere to the anti-scientific nonsense of some politically correct, cult-leading, franchise seller. "

“The reader controls what he reads, not the author.”

these are my favorite qoutes out of all this mess-they need to be put ona bumper sticker or immoralized in some other way…

[Txfarrier11]

Yes, Tom, its very important to econimize on the posts. Do you think they grow on trees or something?
While no trees are actualy destroyed in this process, millions of electrons are terribly inconvienced.

[slb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tom Stovall, CJF:
I don’t trim/shoe on the basis of academic conjecture, I rely on demonstrable efficacy.

I can’t say I’ve ever “cured” any form of navicular syndrome, but I’ve returned several to service, and done so on a timely basis - as in limp on the mats, walk off sound. Horses trimmed/shod according to the protocols I espouse have won G-1 stakes, barrel racing go-rounds at the NFR, high dollar grand prix, and countless other measures of speed, athletic ability, and agility. As a consequence, I’m not quite ready to place any reliance on the untested protocols of academia, no matter how highly touted.

I’d be most interested in knowing what you’d do for a barrel horse that has been diagnosed with NS in October when the richest rodeo in the world, the NFR, is coming up in December. BTDT, it’s not a fun thing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My only response is that it is quite evident that you your success comes from working for the human client…and indeed many farriers do this as, afterall, it is they that pay the bills and insure the farrier’s continuted employment.

On the other hand, the success that I speak of comes from working for the equine client. If it takes a year for the horse to heal, then the human will have to “suck it up”. If not, then I suspect, they call you or those who subscribe to your methods. IMO, any horse in need of a therapeutic application should not be in world, national or even local competition. In my world, horses are expected to perform, but they are no longer treated as livestock.

[cyberbay]

LMH-
Would love the article. I am in a bit of a hurry this AM, and don’t have a moment to discern if any of the following posts, from other wonderful posters like you who have taken the time to help me help this horse,include that same article!
More later…sorry for the haste.

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LMH:
mmmm…sorry another point caught my exhausted eye-regarding the AP balancing not being studied…then how would you know if long term damage is not indeed being done.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Lack of evidence suggesting long term damage is a good indicator. Both the DIJ and PIJ flex in an A/P plane, neither flexes much M/L - a factor that allows the existence of a balance “window.” The parameters of M/L balance are much more unforgiving because the consequences of imbalance are immediate and involve unequal bone-to-bone loading.</span>

As far as the generalization that hunters last longer than hunters…again I think that just ALL depends on the total care provided, the overall athleticism and strength of the horse and many other factors that would prohibit making a sweeping statement. Granted just the fact the hunters max out at 4ft (regular working division) and traditional jumpers max out around 5’6" or so (not even taking into account puissance (spelling?), that alone of course can contribute to a horses longevity…however, different care provides different care.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>When considering all the horses deemed hunters by the USEF, in my experience, hunters last longer than jumpers.</span>

Also regarding the dressage horses with shot hocks, just being in a betting kind of mood, I am willing to lay a little money that there are also horses competing in the disciplines that you mentioned, as well as WP horses and all other disciplines that are suffering from the same degeneration of hock joints.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Again, in my experience, dressage horses have a higher incidence of hock problems than do flat racers, hunters, and jumpers. With respect to hock pathologies, the incidence in dressage horses is similar to that of barrel horses, harness horses, and reiners. One can hypothesize the greater incidence is related to use.</span>

So, bringing this back on track to the original topic…in a small readers digest version, could you explain to me your process and ultimate goal for treating a horse exhibiting navicular pain…obviously you want him pain free…but how exactly do you get there? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Bear in mind that the majority of my custom is comprised of show and performance horses. On presentation of horses diagnosed with navicular syndrome and in the absence of veterinary prescription other than, “Fix the horse,” I do whatever I can to address the biomechanical causes of the pathology, protect the affected area from environmental pressure, and make the foot as efficient as possible. Usually, not always, this consists of reducing the length of the phalangeal lever, increasing phalangeal angulation, and the application of some type of bar shoe to protect the affected area.</span>

[slb]

Then you assume that all or at least the majority of navicular syndrome is the result of compression? What about concussion? And how does misalingment of the joints promote or reduce compression?

BTW…
To add to your list of reading suggestions for Lookout:

Willemen et al. 1999, Orthopedic Shoeing Effects on the Navicular Bone in Horses

“Egg-bar shoes did not reduce the force on the navicular bone but in unshod feet this force appeared to be 14% lower (P<0.05) compared to flat shoes.”

And another FYI:
If you look beyond current university texts, you will find that researchers that teach out of those books find flaws in them. For example, Dr. Lewis…“father of protein caues problems in growing horses”…has long since retracted his negative statements about protein, but it still remains in univeristy texts and is still taught in the classroom. It is generally agreed that vets are coming out of school at least a decade or more behind the research.

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

Originally posted by LMH:

[deletia]

The fact is you base your ideas on old “proven scientific methods”—

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Not even close. A hypothesis (SWAG) can never be “proven”, it can only be confirmed or disproved. A hypothesis must be capable of disproof and a single instance of disproof requires modification or rejection of the hypothesis. Remember cold fusion?</span>

but that fact also remains that ideas or theories going against tried and true always face rejection and ridicule…until accepted .

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Would that be like the so-called “discovery” of a callus between the apex of the frog and the white line in feral horses that was claimed to be a part of horses’ genotype and not a function of horses’ environment - until somebody had the temerity to point out the allegedly genotypic structure was not present in neonatal horn?</span>

The list of scienitic ideas that were accepted for years, only to one day be rejected is I am sure as long as new notions that proved false…so only time will tell I suppose.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Testing, not time, will tell definitively. Meanwhile, no matter how fervent one’s belief in the latest trendy hypotheses, when one pulls the bar shoes off a horse that needs them, the horse hurts.</span>

[Melelio]

Som, Tom, are you saying because Ovnicek and Bowker have not done the traditional study to your satisfaction, and published it in a vet magazine, even though he has the support from Vet schools, that they are WRONG?

Do you know that they are wrong? Have you really looked at their study with a clearly open mind? I found it quite stimulating reading, and a very viable possibility, seeing as how this study of horse hoof mechanism has really come to the forefront in the last few years.

I do hope that all practitioners of any kind, human and animals, will keep their minds wide open to the possibilities.

There’s a reason I had a hard time finding an endocrinologist in a big town like Wash DC…the majority of them were so steeped in their traditional way of thinking that I knew I would never be properly treated. I was lucky enough to find a doctor who also embraced alternative and holisitic medicines, and had kept up on her MD studies of her specialty as well. I think that may be a rarity today, as far as the ego factor mentioned earlier goes. Who knows for sure?

[LMH]

Tom, you posted while I posted…would you please explain (generally) how you would trim a jumper different from a dressage? Or choose a different comparison if there is no difference in that one…for example do you leave more heel on a jumper? more toe? etc?

Wouldn’t a foot in balance be a foot in balance regardless of the discipline in which the horse is used? How can you change trims from use to use and still end up with a foot that is balanced and the joints aligned?

[Bensmom]

I’m still trying to catch up and debating about whether I should even ask you guys my questions, as here lately, I’ve come up with a bunch of new ones, but I wanted to add to this, posted by Ghazzu:

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> posted Aug. 24, 2004 08:48 PM
quote:

Originally posted by Bea:
Can’t, hasn’t, someone done a 3D computer model of a horse?

I believe the “Glass Horse” folks have recently come out with a musculoskeletal module, but I haven’t seen it yet.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have it. I got it for my birthday. Yep, I’m pretty odd. It is pretty good, but would be even better if you could change stuff on it and make it move – i.e. you could show how the hoof balance puts stress on tendons, ligaments, and other bony structures. As it is, it is basically a 3-d anatomy diagram. Which is good, of course, but I’d still like to be able to put things in motion, especially if you could unbalance the foot and then compare how the rest of the leg reacts – good start though.

More info here: link to glass horse info

And I will ask one tiny question, before retreating to finish reading to catch up, at which point I’ll probably have a ton of questions:

Mr. Stovall posted:

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> however, in a living horse, absent some catastrophic event, when the flexor muscles are flexed, the DDFT places the sesamoids in compression.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which would explain, on my TB that raced on horrid, horrid long toe, low heel feet, why today he has bony changes mostly on the sesamoids, wouldn’t it? If the DDFT is pulling at its attachments and there is too much compression to the sesamoids, due to too much force applied to the DDFT as it works, it will eventually cause trauma/friction that will cause the body to lay down additional bone, thus creating arthritic bony changes, yes?

Which would be why he is able to work without pain or inflammation there only if we keep the stress on that area reduced, yes?

Hmm – must go back and read more . . .

Libby

[slb]

I’ll second that…what Stovall is saying contracidcts itself. He acknowledges that “naricular syndrome” is heel pain, which implies that the horse would not load its heels. Then goes on to indiacte that the way to address the problem is to lessen the forces on the DDFT. If the heel is not weighted, then there cannot be these forces on the DDFT that are eluded to.

From my experience, successful treatment of navicular…and I have seen horses with years of lameness restored to soundness…is to reduce concussion (either through shoing or barefoot), remove external excess leverage forces such as long toes and underrun heels, and trim for a low heel that allows maximum ground contact of frog and optimal function that will help restore health to the digital cushion. Often navicular horses have damaged digital cushions (Bowker).

The way that this article indicates to address the issue is as Stovall notes…not a cure, but a fix. However, if addressed by correctly aligning and balancing the feet, it can be eliminated in the majority of cases. In general navicular is a “created” problem, not a natural one. Poor hoof shape is the primary contributor.

Addressing the problem as noted by Stovall is setting the horse up for a continuation of the problem. If the heels are encouraged to grow high or are otherwise enhanced through wedges, there is reduction of circulation to the toe (Pollitt). If the frog is “protected” rather than allowed to make ground contact and be fully functional, then the problem will be enhanced. While all these things result in a temprory relief of pain, they then introduce a whole other set of problems that must be fixed.

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lookout:
That’s a real shame. The failure of farriers to help many horses is not funny, except to themselves.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Re: The ludicrous claim of returning 95% of lame presentations to service without utilization of mechanical therapeutic/palliative devices.</span>

That sound your hear in the background is the unrestrained laughter of a multitude of farriers, veterinarians, and assorted horsemen who find your statement to be utter mendacity. Assuming horses in use presented unsound, no one on the planet with any sizable custom has returned 95% of those horses to being sound for service without total or partial reliance on various mechanical therapeutic and palliative therapies. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

“A real shame?” Dare I point out that the role of traditional farriery in healing/palliating lame horses and returning them to service has been well documented since Kikkulis the Hittite wrote his little chariot manual? On the other hand, folks who subject their horses to the tender ministrations of the barefoot-at-any-cost movement are operating on untested protocols resultant of hypotheses that have never been subjected to scientific testing, publication and peer review - often with deleterious effect to the horses involved. In the unlikely event that barefoot basket cases - much less sound horses - start winning races, puissances, and grand prix, they’ll still be plowing ground that was long ago tilled by traditional farriery.

As advertised, I’m a fan of stuff that works. On the other hand, I have the utmost contempt for anyone who allows a horse to live in pain in order to adhere to the anti-scientific nonsense of some politically correct, cult-leading, franchise seller.

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Melelio:

[QUOTE] Tom: when one pulls the bar shoes off a horse that needs them, the horse hurts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, and when a human patient with smashed and shattered ribs comes into the hospital and is simply given morphine for the pain, he feels better, too. Should we send him home with a lifetime supply of morphine, and not fix the underlying problems?

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>You are obviously confused about the dynamics of palliation: A bar shoe does not interfere with the transmission of nervous impulses; instead, it mechanically addresses the source of the pain. If you wish to condemn a mechanical procedure, please do so on the basis of reality, not personal conjecture.</span>

You certainly are closed-minded, that’s been proven here in our own personal study. You enjoy band-aiding your clients’ horses.

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>I “enjoy” enabling horses to do whatever they do without pain or ill effect - if that’s a Bad Thing, I’m guilty as charged.</span>

I think I’ll bow out of this conversation as I don’t think anything anyone says to you will satisfy you, unless we say “yessir yessir three bags full”. And I’m not one to bow low, ask my DH

<span class=“ev_code_RED”>Riding off into the sunset while muttering ad hominems over one’s shoulder is the typical behavior of someone with their mind made up who doesn’t want to be bothered with facts. Que la vaya bien.</span>

[JB]

Ok Tom Stovall, I had to go look you up and found your site. I was reading the article on the 4-pt trim and have LOTS of questions on this statement:

"Basically, the so-called “four point trim” or “natural trim” is a reflection of the wear of horses’ feet in abrasive environments, but such wear cannot be demonstrated to be a Good Thing. Trimming a horse a certain way because they will eventually wear their feet in that manner is just as logical as rasping off the rubber on one’s tires because that’s the way they’ll eventually wear. "

Can you PLEASE explain how trimming the foot the way the horse is trimming it necessarily a bad thing?

[Tom_Stovall_CJF1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lookout:
With such a low success rate, what is it exactly you’re trying to teach? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aren’t you the scholar who wrote, <span class=“ev_code_RED”>“There is no pressure on the navicular bone from the DDFT. In fact the more weight the horse applies to the foot the further the DDFT is pushed away from the bone…”</span>?

Given this demonstration of your vast knowledge of equid anatomy, I apparently didn’t fare to well against your willful ignorance and intellectual intransigence. On the off chance that you might consider trading your ignorance for knowledge, you might consider looking up the etiology of navicular syndrome in any college level textbook.