Sepsis 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.

中文翻译：

---

用针式或腹腔镜灌洗治疗化脓性跟骨滑囊炎后的疗效比较：29匹马的回顾性研究

跟骨法氏囊（CB）败血症提出了重大的治疗挑战，文献中可用的临床数据有限。这项回顾性队列研究的目的是使用穿通穿刺针或腹腔镜技术评估与CB灌洗相关的临床结局。回顾了2005年至2019年之间使用这两种技术治疗败血性跟骨滑囊炎的29匹马的临床记录。Fisher精确检验用于评估首次手术技术与首次手术成功（即无需洗洗> 1次），出院生存和重返工作（RTW）之间的统计学显着性。腹腔镜检查在13/29（44.8％）例中进行，洗针在16/29（55.2％）中。在针头组中，第一次手术后有12（75％）匹马出院。有四个重复了干预措施。两（12。有5％的人洗了针，有两次（12.5％）的有镜检。在两匹重复洗针的马中，一匹被施以安乐死，另一匹被放出腹腔镜，其中一匹被放出，另一匹在出院前接受了第三次腹腔镜检查。腹腔镜检查组在第一次手术后出院了7例（53.8％），进行了安乐死的3例（23.1％）。三名（23.1％）接受了第二次腹腔镜灌洗，其中一人出院，一名接受安乐死，另一人在出院前接受了第三次腹腔镜灌洗。总体而言，RTW随访病例为18/24（75％），针刺组为10（55.5％），腹腔镜检查组为8（44.4％）。使用的首次手术技术与首次手术的成功率之间没有统计学上的显着差异（不需要随后的灌洗），发现出院或重返工作的存活率。该研究的主要局限性在于它是一项回顾性研究，人口少，统计能力和潜在选择偏倚有限。两种方法的结果之间没有统计学上的显着差异，这与认为腔镜灌洗效果更好是相反的。需要更大的，多中心的研究并具有更大的统计能力才能进一步评估这种关系。