Data Collection for the Fourth Multicentre Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Equine Fatalities (CEPEF4) Study: New Technology and Preliminary Results

SIMPLE SUMMARY: New technologies allow researchers to improve the methods for immediate, accurate data collection, cleaning and analysis, with minimal geographical limitations. Although much has improved in the field of equine anaesthesia in recent years, we are still far from reducing anaesthetic-related mortality in this species in comparison with small animal anaesthesia. The aim of this multicentre study was to probe the usefulness of an internet-based method that utilised an electronic questionnaire and statistical software to show the data and report outcomes from horses undergoing general anaesthesia and certain procedures using standing sedation. Within six months, 8656 cases from 69 centres were collected: 6701 procedures under general anaesthesia and 1955 under standing sedation. The results demonstrated (i) the utility of the method and (ii) that some horses died unexpectedly when undergoing not only general anaesthesia, but also standing sedation. Finally, (iii) we present some descriptive data that outline the current anaesthesia practice compared with the previous CEPEF2. We concluded that our internet-based method is suitable for this type of study. New techniques may reduce the mortality rate. However, the results presented here should be interpreted cautiously as these are only preliminary data with lower numbers than CEPEF2. ABSTRACT: It is almost 20 years since the largest observational, multicentre study evaluating the risks of mortality associated with general anaesthesia in horses. We proposed an internet-based method to collect data (cleaned and analysed with R) in a multicentre, cohort, observational, analytical, longitudinal and prospective study to evaluate peri-operative equine mortality. The objective was to report the usefulness of the method, illustrated with the preliminary data, including outcomes for horses seven days after undergoing general anaesthesia and certain procedures using standing sedation. Within six months, data from 6701 procedures under general anaesthesia and 1955 standing sedations from 69 centres were collected. The results showed (i) the utility of the method; also, that (ii) the overall mortality rate for general anaesthesia within the seven-day outcome period was 1.0%. In horses undergoing procedures other than exploratory laparotomy for colic (“noncolics”), the rate was lower, 0.6%, and in “colics” it was higher, at 3.4%. For standing sedations, the overall mortality rate was 0.2%. Finally, (iii) we present some descriptive data that demonstrate new developments since the previous CEPEF2. In conclusion, horses clearly still die unexpectedly when undergoing procedures under general anaesthesia or standing sedation. Our method is suitable for case collection for future studies.