Should I consider a second surgery for my girls?

[HalaBuns]

Hi All

I’ve not been on the forum for a while, but some of you may recall I have 2 female buns named Gigi and Kiki. They are both rescues and I adopted them in 2020. I think they are around 4-5 years old, but cannot be totally sure.

Before I adopted them, the kind lady who rescued them had them spayed. I have discovered today, however, that they had an ovariectomy procedure, rather than a ovariohysterectomy, therefore the uterus was not removed. This was apparently the standard procedure preferred by the vet at the time.

I’m pretty gutted that they still have a uterine cancer risk, which up to now I thought had been eradicated. I have tried to find information about whether removing the ovaries serves as a preventative measure for uterine cancer, and it seems to be a controversial issue with conflicting opinions.

I have a call with another rabbit savvy vet tomorrow to see what he thinks, but if anyone has any knowledge or advice, that would be welcomed.

I really do not want to put them through another surgery, particularly given their age. But equally I would find it hard to forgive myself if they developed cancer and I had not tried to prevent it.

All in all, I’m sad that the 3 of us have been put in this situation, but maybe there has been recent research that shows benefits of an ovariectomy over an ovariohysterectomy

Here are my cute babies

 

[Watermelons]

That just seems so bizarre that any vet would do that surgery, and on rabbits of all animals. There is zero pro to keeping the uterus. "Sparing" surgery typically keeps the ovaries for the sake of the hormones and removes the tubes or way for eggs to get to uterus.

How did you confirm that this is what happened?

 

[HalaBuns]

That just seems so bizarre that any vet would do that surgery, and on rabbits of all animals. There is zero pro to keeping the uterus. "Sparing" surgery typically keeps the ovaries for the sake of the hormones and removes the tubes or way for eggs to get to uterus.

How did you confirm that this is what happened?

I know, it’s actually infuriating.

This particular vet performed the spay and neuter surgeries on a lot of the rescues (including all of my rescues and fosters). Through the bunny community we happened to learn recently that ovariectomy was performed most of the time. I had no idea before then that there was even an option for different procedures, options were not given to us. I requested clarification from the vet practice and they confirmed ovariectomy only for my girls, and that they did not remove the uterus.

The vet moved away several months ago. I’m sure she must have had some belief that it was in their best interest in some way, she was very experienced.

I have another female bun, but thankfully she was given a “full” spay, as her uterus was enlarged.

 

[Watermelons]

I would look into having an ultrasound done to confirm.
Because unless you personally spoke directly to the vet, i would not believe the uterus was left in.
What usually happens is people speak to a staff member at a clinic who words something incorrectly.
Look how many clinics tell people to fast their rabbits before surgery. Yet a proper rabbit vet would never say that. But most of that comes from front end staff who accidentally say the same thing they do for dogs/cats because they dont know better.
Or remember the game of telephone you played as a kid? How likely is it that someone was told 1 thing (ovariohysterectomy) and forgot a word and now has told everyone else involved with the rescue a slightly different word (ovariohysterectomy) its very possible....

 

[HalaBuns]

I would look into having an ultrasound done to confirm.
Because unless you personally spoke directly to the vet, i would not believe the uterus was left in.
What usually happens is people speak to a staff member at a clinic who words something incorrectly.
Look how many clinics tell people to fast their rabbits before surgery. Yet a proper rabbit vet would never say that. But most of that comes from front end staff who accidentally say the same thing they do for dogs/cats because they dont know better.
Or remember the game of telephone you played as a kid? How likely is it that someone was told 1 thing (ovariohysterectomy) and forgot a word and now has told everyone else involved with the rescue a slightly different word (ovariohysterectomy) its very possible....

Yes, I understand what you mean. I actually found it stated right at the bottom of their medical records too though “ovariectomy performed”, so I don’t think it was a miscommunication.

I discussed it with my vet last night and he explained that it’s common to perform an ovariectomy in cats and dogs. By removing the ovaries, it “deactivates” the uterus, which means it no longer goes through the cycles and changes which can lead to problems, cancer etc.

There are not enough studies on bunnies, but the assumption by some vets is that it is the same for them.

He said 10 years ago it would have been a complete no-no for buns, but the medical community have been investing more time into research recently and it is becoming more widely practiced.

He personally performs a hysterectomy as well “because, why not”.

He said he could perform another surgery on my buns if I wanted, but believes there would be a really really low chance of them having issues (could not guarantee 100% of course), so not sure it would be worth it.

He’s also going to try to find some recent studies for me.

 

[jeff38002]

I'd suggest researching exactly why you think rabbits have a high chance of developing uterine cancer. Unless I'm mistaken, the one study (that I assume most people are basing their belief in such an insanely high cancer risk for female buns) involved only several dozen rabbits (about 70 total I believe) from one farm that arguably was not taking very good care of it's livestock (they were meat rabbits). If memory serves correctly, the authorities were removing the animals from the farm due to neglect. There are many things that can contribute to higher cancer risks, not the least of which being diet and genetics - both were probably much less than ideal in that meat rabbit situation and/or farm. I find it strange how many major medical decisions are based off of only 70 rabbits... or stranger yet, off of only 7 or 8 mice.

 

[Preitler]

My take on this topic:
There were more studies done, and although the rates used as deadbeat argument (mainly in the US because of a quite successful campaign to fix cats and dogs to reduce the load on shelters that ran for decades and became a project for generations of activists, and became a comon trope to advocate for by itself across species), well, that rates are blown out of proportion on purpose.

Anyway. It is still a real risk, and not a small one. About at least twice that of humans (another 50 years at the current rate and we'll have caught up) My guess is that it's about 20-25% in their lifetime (also imo depends a lot on breeding lines), not the 80% at 3 years that get parroted over and over, but still a very good reason to spay. And in my opinion there are other arguments that weight even heavier to spay pet does. Had an intact doe inside for 8 months, I can sing a song about my lil Fury...
My current free range house bunny Dotty is spayed, her partner Pacino is still an intact male, but that might change since I'm about to rescue a young buck. Can't believe I'm using the term "rescue", but in that case it fits - caught an escapee for a meat breeder down the road (I'm really good at catching all kinds of small critters), and seeing the difference in behaviour between out in the open to back in the cage, well, I guess he'll be my 4th herd buck, maybe. It's just too heartbreaking.

Anyway. I have no idea how uterine problems are connected to ovarian hormone levels, and what the interaction is. I do not know. There are smarter people out there that actually do research, and it is definitly interesting if a way less invasive surgery can have good results. That would be a good thing, by the time does are old enough for spaying most owners get pretty attached to them, if just neutering them does the job too, well, that would be great.

 

[Popsicles]

Although not yet proven there is some suggestion that ovariectomy alone reduces the risk of uterine cancer as without the hormones the uterus all but shrivels up anyway, and it is largely the hormones that “encourage” abnormal uterine growth (i.e neoplasia) There is also a much bigger risk when performing a full ovariohysterectomy of accidentally ligating the ureters - this is a much smaller risk when just removing ovaries. I would not be inclined to go in for a repeat surgery if it were me.

 

[HalaBuns]

I'd suggest researching exactly why you think rabbits have a high chance of developing uterine cancer. Unless I'm mistaken, the one study (that I assume most people are basing their belief in such an insanely high cancer risk for female buns) involved only several dozen rabbits (about 70 total I believe) from one farm that arguably was not taking very good care of it's livestock (they were meat rabbits). If memory serves correctly, the authorities were removing the animals from the farm due to neglect. There are many things that can contribute to higher cancer risks, not the least of which being diet and genetics - both were probably much less than ideal in that meat rabbit situation and/or farm. I find it strange how many major medical decisions are based off of only 70 rabbits... or stranger yet, off of only 7 or 8 mice.

I have to admit my information gathering about the topic has been limited to good old Google, but interesting that all the information out there is potentially largely based on a single study. A friend of mine who has rescued and kept many bunnies over the years actually never spays her females, and may have lost them to other issues, but has never had one experience uterine cancer.

 

[HalaBuns]

My take on this topic:
There were more studies done, and although the rates used as deadbeat argument (mainly in the US because of a quite successful campaign to fix cats and dogs to reduce the load on shelters that ran for decades and became a project for generations of activists, and became a comon trope to advocate for by itself across species), well, that rates are blown out of proportion on purpose.

Anyway. It is still a real risk, and not a small one. About at least twice that of humans (another 50 years at the current rate and we'll have caught up) My guess is that it's about 20-25% in their lifetime (also imo depends a lot on breeding lines), not the 80% at 3 years that get parroted over and over, but still a very good reason to spay. And in my opinion there are other arguments that weight even heavier to spay pet does. Had an intact doe inside for 8 months, I can sing a song about my lil Fury...
My current free range house bunny Dotty is spayed, her partner Pacino is still an intact male, but that might change since I'm about to rescue a young buck. Can't believe I'm using the term "rescue", but in that case it fits - caught an escapee for a meat breeder down the road (I'm really good at catching all kinds of small critters), and seeing the difference in behaviour between out in the open to back in the cage, well, I guess he'll be my 4th herd buck, maybe. It's just too heartbreaking.

Anyway. I have no idea how uterine problems are connected to ovarian hormone levels, and what the interaction is. I do not know. There are smarter people out there that actually do research, and it is definitly interesting if a way less invasive surgery can have good results. That would be a good thing, by the time does are old enough for spaying most owners get pretty attached to them, if just neutering them does the job too, well, that would be great.

Thank you Prietler

It does seem to be a topic to keep an eye on. As there are other benefits to spaying (behavioural, for example) if a less risky surgery can be as good from a health perspective too then it would be great, as you say.

 

[HalaBuns]

Although not yet proven there is some suggestion that ovariectomy alone reduces the risk of uterine cancer as without the hormones the uterus all but shrivels up anyway, and it is largely the hormones that “encourage” abnormal uterine growth (i.e neoplasia) There is also a much bigger risk when performing a full ovariohysterectomy of accidentally ligating the ureters - this is a much smaller risk when just removing ovaries. I would not be inclined to go in for a repeat surgery if it were me.

Thank you, that does align exactly with what my vet said.

I do feel a lot more at ease about the reasoning for this approach and I’m relieved that a second surgery is not necessary. I lost my most precious rescue during spay surgery earlier in the year. She was my heart bun and I’ve never been so devastated about anything in my life, so I would be particularly anxious, especially as they are middle-aged ladies now.

I’ve gained some knowledge through this though, so that‘s always good.

 

[jeff38002]

My take on this topic:
There were more studies done, and although the rates used as deadbeat argument (mainly in the US because of a quite successful campaign to fix cats and dogs to reduce the load on shelters that ran for decades and became a project for generations of activists, and became a comon trope to advocate for by itself across species), well, that rates are blown out of proportion on purpose.

Anyway. It is still a real risk, and not a small one. About at least twice that of humans (another 50 years at the current rate and we'll have caught up) My guess is that it's about 20-25% in their lifetime (also imo depends a lot on breeding lines), not the 80% at 3 years that get parroted over and over, but still a very good reason to spay. And in my opinion there are other arguments that weight even heavier to spay pet does. Had an intact doe inside for 8 months, I can sing a song about my lil Fury...
My current free range house bunny Dotty is spayed, her partner Pacino is still an intact male, but that might change since I'm about to rescue a young buck. Can't believe I'm using the term "rescue", but in that case it fits - caught an escapee for a meat breeder down the road (I'm really good at catching all kinds of small critters), and seeing the difference in behaviour between out in the open to back in the cage, well, I guess he'll be my 4th herd buck, maybe. It's just too heartbreaking.

Anyway. I have no idea how uterine problems are connected to ovarian hormone levels, and what the interaction is. I do not know. There are smarter people out there that actually do research, and it is definitly interesting if a way less invasive surgery can have good results. That would be a good thing, by the time does are old enough for spaying most owners get pretty attached to them, if just neutering them does the job too, well, that would be great.

any chance of pointing me in the right direction so I may read up on those other studies? I've looked everywhere I can think of and I can't find anything other than anecdotal "evidence".
Thanks in advance