Minimum x-rays for a dressage prepurchase?

[Trigger]

What do you consider minimum essential films for vetting a dressage prospect? Assuming a clean clinical exam with no problems noted in flexion or otherwise, no disclosed unsoundness history, and in the 7-10 age range? Do you consider the price of the animal in making this decision?

[dutchfan]

20 films
Both front feet (2)
Front pasterns 2 views (4)
Stifles 2 views (4)
Hocks 3 views (6)
Hind pasterns 2 views (4)

[NOMIOMI1]

Hocks and front feet. If flexed well just the front feet in my opinion.

[ideayoda]

Depends upon the use of the horse, and what the vet thinks about the flexions. I rarely have any done (perhaps a few hock ones for baseline) unless I am planning to resell a horse. Ask the vet.

[Valentina_32926]

I wuld say it depends on the price of the horse. :sadsmile:
Less than 10K I wouldn't bother - then again if horse is lame in a year or so from something that could be caught here you might be kicking yourself in the butt.

[inca]

I just bought a low 5 figure horse and didn't do any. She is 14 and flexed great. I didn't see the point in spending a ton on x-rays since she has been in full work, is sound and flexed great. The correlation between x-rays and soundness is not all that great for front feet and hocks. (That is, a lame horse can have great x-rays and a sound horse can have questionable x-rays.)

On a younger, more expensive horse, I'd probably have hock and stifles done to check for OCD and developing arthritis.

It really depends on how much risk you are willing to accept. Talk to your vet and take into consideration the level of work the horse is in now and the level of work you will be asking it to do.

[Pony Fixer]

20 films
Both front feet (2)
Front pasterns 2 views (4)
Stifles 2 views (4)
Hocks 3 views (6)
Hind pasterns 2 views (4)

Interesting. Just laterals of the front feet? No navicular views?

[InsideLeg2OutsideRein]

Also depends if the horse is currently in full work. If not, I'd do more, if yes, less, but definitely front feet / navicular (for a baseline) and hocks, and since this totally bit me in the behind with my current horse, I'd probably do stifles just so.

[dutchfan]

Interesting. Just laterals of the front feet? No navicular views?
Oxspring views (DP)
Only skyline if the DP views show something alarming.

[purplnurpl]

If you decide not to do any at all....please reconsider and at least do front feet.
I learned that the hard way.
: (

[lexhex]

Yes, consider price, use of horse and history of horse. Was the horse a jumper or pasture ornament? Radiographs are cheap insurance. Ask a vet that has the same sensibility as yourself. Someone with a specialty in sport horse medicine (and a new grad) will say something different than someone who sees all kinds. I'd take breed, price and history into consideration. Hocks, feet....blood.
Best of luck!
:)

[Kareen]

I am quite comfortable with 12 views: AP navicular (2), laterals of each toe (4), two views each hock (4) and laterals of the stifles (2). For myself I have never bothered but I sell mor than I buy and when I buy I generally buy either very young or for breeding. To me the clinical picture is worth more than any x-ray. That being said if you are spending money that is substantial to you I'd consider getting in insured which requires x-rays anyways. If you are spending $$ as a precaution you might just as well put some risk on someone else's shoulders.
I have never insured any of my own horses but I do see the point for someone who is making purchasing. I know mine from scratch and I know how they have been raised and treated.

[Pony Fixer]

Insurance does NOT require radiographs, unless you opt for loss of use. Standard mortality and medical/surgical coverage only requires a routine PE (and sometimes not even that).

[Miss Dior]

All 4 naviculars !!!!!! Not just the front feet. Stifles are essential. Others as suggested.

[flyracing]

To directly answer you question, the minimum is zero ;)

I personally have never xrayed at a ppe because I either knew the horse (like for over a year) and it wasn't worth a lot (a matter of perspective of course), horse was young and sound, or was imported and came with xrays. BUT if I was buying an expensive horse I didn't know... I'd do navicular view and hocks for baselines that *shouldn't* affect the choice of buying the horse, but is done before the purchase cause you can. I wouldn't spend the money looking at other things if the horse is completely clean in flexions.

Xrays do NOT tell you how sound a horse is, how much pain they feel, and most certainly will not tell you how those factors will be in 5 years, but that does not mean they are not indicators of issues or a good negotiating deal. Some horses will be lame with clean xrays and other horses will be sound with poor xrays (I've had both...)

My main advice would be to go with your gut. Do you think you need to xray anthing on this horse to make yourself sleep better at night? Do you want any baselines, which might as well be done before you fork over a bunch of dough?

[LoveMyTB]

When I did a vet check on my Dressage WB purchase I had about 40 x-rays taken. My vet concentrated on hocks more so. The problem with most Dressage horses at a 3rd level or higher is hock spur so it's important to make sure you know what shape the horse's hocks are. My guy did have a minor hock spur nothing to worry about but at least I know and I can maintain it. My pre-purchase cost was close to $750, which is more than a standard exam but I wanted to make sure that I did a very thorough test. I also did blood work for drugs, which costs a lot but at least I know that a horse was not drugged.

[slc2]

Back in the day, I think I had about 30 views taken - including a couple navicular views for each front foot, stifles, hocks, ankles, as well as flexion tests and longeing on different surfaces and everything else. I see xrays as only one part of the picture.

If the xrays were taken by a well known clinic and I could verify the horse's description and identity and the date the xrays were taken was very, very recent, such as in the last week, I would assume they were useful and for the right horse - otherwise not. Then I would get my own. Today with digital xrays it is easier to obtain xrays for a potential purchase, but they should be verified.

Then I would have them read by someone else other than who took them, if there were questions, I would have them reviewed by a third vet. And if there were serious questions I would be done. Different vets view xrays differently. For some it is a matter of current soundness, for others it is a matter of longer term soundness. Having different opinions helps.

If an expensive horse, 40,000-50,000, the xrays are a small portion of the purchase price, and people tend to be less resistant to getting xrays. But for any horse, the cost of maintaining them lifelong is far more than purchasing them. Maintaining a horse that can't be ridden can mean the person has to give up their riding goals, not get another horse, etc.

With a cheap horse, say board is 500 a month, shoeing a thousand a year, vets 300 a year, that's about 7000 a year. In a year of taking care of the horse, 3 times the purchase cost is spent. If a horse is laid up and can't do what you want permanently, the cost is huge. That cheap horse doesn't look so cheap any more. I think people shouldn't look at it as spending a thousand on a two thousand dollar horse, but as, if the horse is laid up, even permanently, how will it affect my budget. Can I ever then get another horse, how would I meet my riding goals, etc.

when I bought less expensive horses I budgeted for the xrays and the prepurchase exam anyway. Not based on the purchase price, but the exposure to long term expenses. I look at it as signing up for a very long term financial responsibility for the animal, not as spending 2000 to buy him.