# Spay Age



## dextersmom

So I'm probably going to regret opening this can of worms... but I'm really looking to make a well rounded, informed decision so I would appreciate those of you who have researched this extensively chiming in!

We're trying to decide when to spay our new pup. We neutered Dexter at a little over 6 months and honestly, don't really regret it. We'll see how healthy he is as he ages - my view on that could easily change. I definitely see how his development is different from an intact V, so that alone gives me pause. He looks more like a deer than a dog! (I'll post a picture so you can see those long legs! He's almost as tall as the Ridgeback in the picture. Neither of his parents is tall at all, so it likely didn't come from them.)

I've been discussing what age to spay at length with our vet (whom I trust). I'd planned on waiting until after her first heat, since I'd like to give her a chance to develop more normally. And I know that it's better for their joints, etc. and that it's been shown that some types of cancer are more prevalent in early desexed V's. (I have seen the most recent study.)

I also worry about spay incontinence, as a lot of the V's we know have it. But I can't for the life of me find any real research that says the age of spay increases their odds of developing it - just that spaying in general does. Does anyone have more info on this?

Our vet is pretty adamant we should do it before the first heat, for a few reasons. I guess their risk of mammary tumors (breast cancer?) increases significantly with each heat. She said she'd look up actual numbers according to our pup's breed to see just what percentage that risk was - she said if it only went up like 10% or so, she wouldn't worry about waiting until after a heat. But apparently after checking, it was a much higher percentage and she still wants us to do it before her first heat. So it seems there is a risk of certain cancers either way - if you spay early or late. 

She also brought up pyometra, which also worries me. Our pup has had recurring UTI's and gets into everything. I'm not surprised she's had issues with UTI's - it's impossible even to keep the underside of her clean. I've never met a dog that liked to be so dirty! I wouldn't be surprised at all if she developed a uterine infection. Her immune system obviously isn't the greatest and she is always filthy on top of it!

Our pup's mom went into heat at about 9 months, so I think we're going to compromise and probably have her spayed around 8 months. So not super young, but to be honest, I'm leaning towards still having her done before the first heat. I know forum members tend to wait and let their dogs have a few heat cycles before spaying.

I know our vet isn't saying these things b/c she wants to make a buck - she knows we'll come to her sooner or later either way. And I'm inclined to trust a medical professional who has based their opinions in science and not in anecdotal evidence. It seems like there are definite pro's and con's either way, and it's a personal decision as to which list is more important to you, but I want to make sure I know what exactly the pro's and con's are according to the research. So send me your required reading


----------



## dextersmom

(Also, we have no spay/neuter clause in our breeder contract.)


----------



## SuperV

We spayed our first dog at 6 months. She isn't disproportionate and is actually on the small side and not real leggy at all. Based on the recent study done on Vizsla's, if you were to ask me what effect I *might* have seen in my pup ... I would have to say she is how do i say politely... very "woman like" (men will understand that)  and by that I mean...always thinking, complex emotions, very very routine based and if the routine changes she gets bothered by it....Example - She wouldn't jump on the couch next to my mother this weekend with her IPAD on her lap. If she put it down, the dog would jump right up.... I don't know that I would attribute any of that to spaying per say, but for all the socialization I did, I do think she is a little more nutty and emotional then she should be... We didn't have any language in the contract, however the breeder suggested waiting.

The male pup we have(6 months right now), he treats everyone like his best friend and is as carefree as they come. We have a clause in our contract with him that we must weight for 2 yrs.


A question I would ask the vet would be how well do they keep up on research in the most tactful way possible. I would speculate a lot of vets standby what they learned in school (however long ago that was), and don't always keep up on research on spaying/neutering. I am not saying that is the case for your vet - just speaking out of speculation and generalities...

I will also say that when we were touring the Budweiser Clydesdale Farm in St. Louis, MO, the lady there had interestingly enough mentioned that they are no longer spaying/neutering their horses until later in life due to "recent research". 

I guess the most subjective way to making your mind up would be to get a handle on the %'s of this condition happening vs that happening and the if they do get something, the ease/cost of treatment....and making your decision that way. I am an engineer - so thats what I would do - ;D ;D ;D ;D

Not sure I helped or not....

Nate


----------



## organicthoughts

Why change what mother nature intended?

Dr. Becker explains it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enPCZA1WFKY


----------



## einspänner

I don't think most vets are in it for the money, but they are susceptible to and in turn add to our society's dogmatic belief that removing important organs is somehow healthier. This is admittedly, possibly faulty logic, but I'm trying to depart from the usual argument of "you wouldn't perform a hysterectomy on a 10 year old!", but removing one of their lungs for instance might reduce the chance of getting lung cancer, but the detriments are very obvious to us as we see how the lungs interact with other systems. With sexual organs we've been taught not to look at their function as holistically. What should be a medical decision has become a moral one and there is lots of judgement from both camps which makes it harder to navigate this very important decision. From what I've read, there are more valid reasons to spay than there are to neuter, and both of these have legitimate medical uses, I personally believe they shouldn't be part of preventative medicine, i.e. prevent pregnancy, prevent cancer, prevent pyometra prevent behavioral problems, etc. I know you want to do what is best and this is no way a criticism of you or even your vet. I actually really appreciate that she looked up breed specific risk factors. I'm just ranting on the internet! 

If you do wait until after the first heat, I wouldn't do it immediately after it's over just because it can take a while for the hormone levels to normalize. Going from the height of estrogen production to having it completely removed is a big shock. So maybe 3-4 months after. For that reason I also wouldn't do it during the heat cycle.

The attachment below is sort of a summary of of different studies and shows the pros and cons to spaying/neutering. All the studies are cited at the end. 

Here Dr. Becker talks about another study that reviewed the methodology and biases of previous studies on the correlation of not spaying and increased risk of mammary tumors. They were unable to reproduce those findings. http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2013/04/10/early-spaying.aspx

Check out the thread on ovary-sparing spays. It's an interesting compromise that preserves hormone production, but removes the risk of pyo, among other things.


----------



## emilycn

I decided to spay Lua after her first heat (it happened around 10 months, she got spayed at 15 months). 

My biggest concern with NOT spaying was the uterine infection, which apparently is not all that uncommon, escalates very quickly, and can be quite deadly. It technically _can_ happen in younger dogs, but it is more commonly found in older dogs (so waiting past the first spay carries some risk of pyometra, but that risk is significantly smaller than it is in older dogs). 

My biggest concern WITH spaying her was the risk of knee, hip, and ligament injuries. In the vizsla study, the risk for injury with early (6 month) spay was significantly (and I don't just mean statistically---I mean meaningfully and appreciably) higher than the risk of mammary tumors in later spay dogs. 

So basically, the decisions to spay or not, and when to spay if you choose to, carry some risk, no matter what path you take. Although minor things like keeping her secluded during her heat and dealing with doggie diapers played some role in my decision, I ultimately chose to spay after her first heat because I felt the likelihood of joint and ligament injuries was much greater than the likelihood of mammary tumors or 1st-cycle pyometra. 

My vet also recommended around 8 months (so before her heat cycle), fwiw.


----------



## lyra

Lyra (who is just over 2 years old) is five days into recovering from Ovary Sparing Surgery (OSS). What that means in her case is she has been spayed but an ovary has been left behind so she retains normal hormonal levels and cycle (you only need one ovary to produce this). Basically it is the same as a women having a hysterectomy (although they usually leave both ovaries).

I'm going to do a 'proper' write up of this when I have more time but I wrote a bit about it in this post http://www.vizslaforums.com/index.php/topic,27841.msg199401.html#msg199401

The study you refer to dextersmom has the following summary:



> Objective—To investigate associations between age at gonadectomy and estimated risk or
> age at diagnosis of neoplastic and behavioral disorders in Vizslas.
> Design—Retrospective cohort study.
> Animals—2,505 Vizslas born between 1992 and 2008.
> Procedures—Data on demographics, gonadectomy status, and age at diagnosis of disease
> or disorder were obtained with an anonymous online survey and analyzed.
> Results—Dogs gonadectomized at  6 months, between 7 and 12 months, or at > 12
> months of age had significantly increased odds of developing mast cell cancer, lymphoma,
> all other cancers, all cancers combined, and fear of storms, compared with the odds for sexually
> intact dogs. Females gonadectomized at  12 months of age and males and females
> gonadectomized at > 12 months of age had significantly increased odds of developing
> hemangiosarcoma, compared with the odds for sexually intact dogs. Dogs gonadectomized
> at  6 months of age had significantly increased odds of developing a behavioral disorder.
> The younger the age at gonadectomy, the earlier the mean age at diagnosis of mast cell
> cancer, cancers other than mast cell, hemangiosarcoma, lymphoma, all cancers combined,
> a behavioral disorder, or fear of storms.
> Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Additional studies are needed on the biological effects
> of removing gonadal hormones and on methods to render dogs infertile that do not
> involve gonadectomy. Veterinarians should discuss the benefits and possible adverse effects
> of gonadectomy with clients, giving consideration to the breed of dog, the owner’s circumstances,
> and the anticipated use of the dog. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;244:309–319)


The important thing to note is that the overall rates of *all* cancers is increased in gonadectomized dogs (which would include breast cancer).



> When controlling for sex,
> the odds of a spayed female Vizsla having
> cancer were significantly (P < 0.001)
> higher (*6.5 times as high*) than the odds
> for sexually intact females, and the odds
> of neutered male Vizslas having cancer
> were significantly (P < 0.001) higher
> (*3.6 times as high*) than the odds for
> sexually intact males


The study also shows behavioural changes (an increase in fear).

Now I wouldn't get too hung up on the results of one study (the paper itself recommends "Additional studies are needed on the biological effects of removing gonadal hormones and on methods to render dogs infertile that do not involve gonadectomy") but there is a similar study with similar results for Labradors and Golden Retrievers.

Vets seem to have developed a tunnel vision about gonadectomy and cancer as if the only cancer that exists for dogs is mammary cancer. Furthermore, when I asked our vet about mammary cancers, she said that they were usually pretty easy to spot and treat by excision. The common varieties are slow to turn malignant so there is a good chance of catching them in time. What is important is not how many dogs get breast cancer but how many die from it.

The study was just part of the reason we decided to opt for OSS (which, as I said before I will write up in detail in a separate post). But to us it had the following advantages:


[li]She can't get pregnant (compared to being left intact)
She can't get pyometra (compared to being left intact)
She won't bleed (compared to being left intact)
She won't get spay incontinence, which is caused by a lack of female hormones (compared to full spay)
She will have a lower chance of getting cancer (compared to full spay and assuming the results of the study are correct)
Her character will be unchanged (compared to full spay and assuming the results of the study are correct)
For younger dogs there is the benefit of lowering the risk of joint problems (compared to full spay) 
[/li]
[li][/li]
The only disadvantage as far as we are concerned is that she will still go into 'heat' as she would normally. She won't bleed but her 'lady parts' will still swell up, she will give out the 'come get me' pheromones and she will become more snappy with any dogs that 'look at her funny'.

I forgot the other disadvantage of OSS - its **** hard to find a vet that performs it.

If we had the choice just between a full spay and leaving Lyra intact, we would have left her intact. The bleeding is an inconvenience but not a big issue and we have suitably quiet walk and a well trained enough dog that will come back to be put on a lead when required.

I think the reason vets push spays so hard is because they want to reduce the population of unwanted dogs (and from what I have read it is working in the UK). This is an important goal but I agree that all not all vets seem to keep up with the latest research and/or offer their clients enough information to make a truly informed decision.


----------



## redbirddog

18 months. Let the grow plates grow correctly. Then snip if needed.

Happy trails,
RBD


----------



## MCD

In our case our vet keeps pushing spaying her before she goes into heat. She wanted us to do it at 6 months. The breeder says wait 3 or 4 months after her heat cycle is finished. Dharma is about 17 months old now and no sign of heat yet. And so the wait is on and so is the debate..... but I have to stand my ground because of contract and what I think is best for Dharma first and us in dealing with her second. It is really a tough call.


----------



## dextersmom

Thank you all for such great information! (And keep it coming if you've got more!) I know this is a controversial topic, so I really appreciate everyone being super helpful AND respectful 



SuperV said:


> A question I would ask the vet would be how well do they keep up on research in the most tactful way possible. I would speculate a lot of vets standby what they learned in school (however long ago that was), and don't always keep up on research on spaying/neutering. I am not saying that is the case for your vet - just speaking out of speculation and generalities...
> 
> I guess the most subjective way to making your mind up would be to get a handle on the %'s of this condition happening vs that happening and the if they do get something, the ease/cost of treatment....and making your decision that way. I am an engineer - so thats what I would do - ;D ;D ;D ;D


My line of thinking as well! Our vet is fairly young (not just out of school, but not old enough to be too old school, haha) and seems really well versed on new research coming out. I tend to ask her a lot of questions (I'm a bit of a high maintenance client for them I think!) and she's always willing to back up her advice with good evidence. 

And yes, %'s is part of what I'm (and our vet) has been looking into! I have no doubt it's better for their joints/ligaments/development to wait on spaying. BUT I'd rather have an ACL tear than say, have my dog die of pyometra. But as the question has been raised here, the risk of tearing an ACL might be way higher than the risk of developing pyometra. More reading for me! Haha.

Thank you for going over that study, Lyra! I was hoping you'd chime in as I just found an old forum thread where you were debating spaying (I've searched before but that one didn't come up) that I found interesting. I checked your posts and saw what you ended up doing, so it was interesting to see what decision you ultimately chose. And I always have trouble deciphering that study. I keep meaning to go over it more carefully with my husband who will have a better grasp of it. It won't let me quote your post, but I did not know that mammary cancer in dogs was pretty easy to find and treat. 



emilycn said:


> It technically _can_ happen in younger dogs, but it is more commonly found in older dogs (so waiting past the first spay carries some risk of pyometra, but that risk is significantly smaller than it is in older dogs).


See, I did not know that!! I need to do some more reading on pyometra. It makes me feel better to know it's more common in older dogs. Our vet did not specifically mention that. I do remember her saying she'd just seen a 7 month old pup with it that almost died. I didn't realize that was uncommon.



emilycn said:


> So basically, the decisions to spay or not, and when to spay if you choose to, carry some risk, no matter what path you take. Although minor things like keeping her secluded during her heat and dealing with doggie diapers played some role in my decision, I ultimately chose to spay after her first heat because I felt the likelihood of joint and ligament injuries was much greater than the likelihood of mammary tumors or 1st-cycle pyometra.


That is exactly my thought process - thank you for articulating it better than I could! I still have to read through all the info attached here. I think I'm a bit less worried about the mammary cancer now, but pyometra still scares me. Our pup seems to pick up e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g. But I'll read more about it now and get a better handle on just how those rates change with age!

And I still need to read those studies and watch that video, einspanner and organic. I don't have time to go over them thoroughly at the moment and I'd like to! So I may have more questions for you then  Leaving her intact indefinitely is not an option, and I don't think OSS is probably feasible for us either. So it's not a matter of "if" but "when" for us.


----------



## sillybluecreature

Thanks so much for bringing this up again. We have the same debate with Whiskey and I feel because we live in the city, it's much harder to have a dog in heat (no dog walkers/daycare/dogparks). All the female Vizslas I've met in the city are fixed young as it's just "normal" and her vet suggests 6 months or a year at the latest. I'm thinking of waiting and seeing how the first heat goes (how much trouble it is) and seeing from there although ideally I'd love to wait as long as possible.


----------



## lilyloo

I'm struggling with spaying or not spaying Ruby. She's 2.5 years old so is beyond the recommended 18-24 months, but I have done so much research that says spaying and neutering Vizslas provides no health benefits, just health risks such as cancer and joint and bone issues. The ONLY reason I am still considering getting her spayed is the pyometra. 

How common is it *really*?


----------



## texasred

This is not research, just what I've seen over the years.

Lilyloo
I had problems with it in the past with some older (they weren't vizsla) dogs, and I mean the dogs were really up there in years. I dislike putting an old dog through that type of surgery, truthfully any surgery is tough on them at that age. My females are 4 years old now, so I know I will get them spayed with in the next couple of years.

Even humans get older, start having some problems ,and have hysterectomies. Not uncommon to have it done in your 40s and 50s. Although uncommon in teens, and people in there 80s and 90s. I guess I've just started to look at my female dogs in the same way.


----------



## emilycn

So the info on pyometra prevalence is pretty easy to find with a quick google search, but for a quick overview, I'll just tell you a bit about the study I was reading "A retrospective study of pyometra at five RSPCA hospitals in the UK: 1728 cases from 2006 to 2011" by Gibson, Dean, Yates, & Stavinsky (2013). 

Their overall finding was that the total prevalence of pyometra in unspayed female dogs (duh) was about 2.2%. The average age of onset was 7.7 years, with 75% of the cases occurring between 5 and 10 years. The range was pretty stunning---from 6 months to slightly less than 20 _years_. So for all intents and purposes, any time between 6 months and natural, old age death. But, the distribution of occurrences was fairly normal with a slight positive skew due to the super-long-lived dogs included in the sample. (see the attached picture). 

Their sample came from 78,469 records of female dogs treated at the RSPCA hospitals in the UK (low-cost or free veterinary services for certain low-income owners) between 2006 and 2011. So not a totally random sample---these dogs come from homes that struggle financially, so there may be some systematic differences between the sample in this study and the general population of dogs in the UK like food, or hygiene, or vaccinations and general health. (Keyword *might*---owners' concern for their dogs' well-being is absolutely not a function of income. So my general point is, it's a concern about the study, but not a large one.)


----------



## dextersmom

Thanks emilycn!

Can anyone interpret this for me? I confess I just skimmed, but I can't seem to figure out how the percentages work.

"An accurate incidence of pyometra within the at-risk un-neutered female dog population is difficult to attain due to the large proportion of neutered dogs within the pet population. *Egenvall and others (2001) reported an overall annual pyometra incidence of 2 per cent from a study of approximately 200,000 predominantly un-neutered Swedish dogs, with around 24 per cent of dogs having experienced pyometra by 10 years of age. A retrospective study of 3536 dogs in the UK reported an upper limit for pyometra incidence of 2 per cent per year within the at-risk population (Whitehead 2008),* whereas, a study of 165 colony-reared beagles reported a prevalence of 15.2 per cent over the dogs' lives (Fukuda 2001)."

So it's roughly a 2% chance each year of the dog's life? But almost 25% of intact female dogs will develop it before 10 years of age? So the annual risk of developing it is low, but the lifetime risk is pretty high? I'm confused! Haha. And the studies do all say that age of onset, etc. probably varies by breed. V's are not one of the breeds specifically listed as possibly having an increased risk.

http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/173/16/396.full


----------



## dextersmom

emilycn said:


> So the info on pyometra prevalence is pretty easy to find with a quick google search, but for a quick overview, I'll just tell you a bit about the study I was reading "A retrospective study of pyometra at five RSPCA hospitals in the UK: 1728 cases from 2006 to 2011" by Gibson, Dean, Yates, & Stavinsky (2013).
> 
> Their overall finding was that the total prevalence of pyometra in unspayed female dogs (duh) was about 2.2%.


Just to clarify: The overall finding was that the total prevalence of pyometra in unspayed female dogs was about 2.2% *over the study period* I think? I'm still not really sure what that means, but it's different then the dogs having a 2.2% chance of developing it in their *entire lifetime*, right? Help! Haha.

http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/a...-rspca-hospitals-uk-1728-cases-from-2006-2011

http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/173/16/396.summary.pdf


----------



## emilycn

So what it's saying is that out of those 200,000 unspayed dogs, 2% of them developed pyometra. Of that 2% (so 4,000 dogs who ever got pyometra), 24% of them got pyometra some time before they turn 10 (so 960 of them). It's over-complicated. That's how we do things in academia.


----------



## emilycn

Just to clarify: The overall finding was that the total prevalence of pyometra in unspayed female dogs was about 2.2% *over the study period* I think? I'm still not really sure what that means, but it's different then the dogs having a 2.2% chance of developing it in their *entire lifetime*, right? Help! Haha.

[/quote]

So this one works like this: In Gibson et al. (2013), they collected the charts of basically all the intact female dogs that came through the door at the 5 state-run clinics around the country (the 78,469 number---that's their total sample). Then of the 78,469, they simply counted how many of those charts included "spay for pyometra treatment" in them. That's where the 2.2% came from---1,726 of those 78,469 dogs were admitted to the clinic for pyometra-induced spay. And most of those dogs were somewhere between 5 and 10 years old. 

[/quote]
Egenvall and others (2001) reported an overall annual pyometra incidence of 2 per cent from a study of approximately 200,000 predominantly un-neutered Swedish dogs, with around 24 per cent of dogs having experienced pyometra by 10 years of age.
[/quote]

In this one, the sample is less clear, so it makes it considerably harder to interpret. But, here's what I surmise from their report. They used a sample of swedish dogs who were 10 years or younger and insured by Agria. They analyzed the number of claims for death or treatment of pyometra. Then they used that info to estimate the overall risk of pyometra for any 12-month period in general, and then estimated risk for pyometra in a 12-month period at a specific age. What they report is that for any intact female chosen at random, her risk for developing pyometra in any 12-month period in her life is about 2%. So we expect that 2% of all intact females (including all age ranges) will get pyometra at some point in their lifetime. Said differently, we expect that in any given year, 2% of all living, intact females will get pyometra. But the authors go on to break this estimate down by age, which makes sense, because we see pyometra more often in older dogs. When the risk is broken into age groups, we expect the following % of intact female dogs that age will get pyometra each year: at ages 0 through 4, the risk is basically steady at around 0% to 1%; at age 5, the risk increases to about 2%; at age 6, the risk is around 2.5 - 3%; at age 7, the risk is about 3.5 - 4%; at age 8, the risk is just under 5%; at age 9 to 10, the risk is about 6 - 6.5%. So the risk gets higher as the dog ages, but the maximum estimated risk still is only at around 6% for all intact females at 10 years of age. Keep in mind, though, this is not a cumulative lifetime risk, given the dog's age, but rather, given that we have a cohort (that is, an entire population of dogs born in the same year) that's just turned 10 years old, we estimate that 6% of that cohort will get pyometra _in the next 12 months_, Because this study only included dogs up to 10 years, they couldn't estimate risk for dogs in older age groups, but it seems likely that the risk continues to increase as the dog ages. So lifetime risk increases as the dog ages _because the estimated risk of pyometra increases with age_. Two dogs that are the same age are equally as likely to get pyometra, but if one of those dogs is much older than the other, the older dog is at a considerably increased risk.


----------



## MCD

I'm sorry- I'm just not getting what the connection between pyometra and spaying is.
Is this something that they have a greater risk of getting if not spayed, or is spaying more of a preventative?
I just know where things stand and spaying has to be done in this house despite all the studies, but it will be done after a heat cycle and time for everything to settle again.


----------



## dextersmom

MCD - This explains it better than I could...

http://www.universityvet.com/resource/pyometra-dogs

Emily - Thank you, again, haha  Still trying to work this out in my head... I'm still with you here...



emilycn said:


> Said differently, we expect that in any given year, 2% of all living, intact females will get pyometra. But the authors go on to break this estimate down by age, which makes sense, because we see pyometra more often in older dogs. When the risk is broken into age groups, we expect the following % of intact female dogs that age will get pyometra each year: at ages 0 through 4, the risk is basically steady at around 0% to 1%; at age 5, the risk increases to about 2%; at age 6, the risk is around 2.5 - 3%; at age 7, the risk is about 3.5 - 4%; at age 8, the risk is just under 5%; at age 9 to 10, the risk is about 6 - 6.5%. So the risk gets higher as the dog ages...
> 
> Two dogs that are the same age are equally as likely to get pyometra, but if one of those dogs is much older than the other, the older dog is at a considerably increased risk.


But lost here...



emilycn said:


> So what it's saying is that out of those 200,000 unspayed dogs, 2% of them developed pyometra. Of that 2% (so 4,000 dogs who ever got pyometra), 24% of them got pyometra some time before they turn 10 (so 960 of them).


Is that same as saying, "...out of those 200,000 unspayed dogs, 2% of them developed pyometra. Of that 2% (so 4,000 dogs who ever got pyometra), 24% of *those dogs* got pyometra some time before they turn 10 (so 960 of them)?"

Am I reading that right? But that entire 2% got pyometra. So that would mean roughly the other 76% still got pyometra... just after age 10? There's where I'm lost.

I think this is the part that I'm having trouble with, though I think I'm starting to get it.



> So lifetime risk increases as the dog ages _because the estimated risk of pyometra increases with age.
> _


_ 
So I guess it's the whole annual % risk vs. lifetime % risk that has me stumped. Everything I think I've read online says gives the annual % risk to be around 2% and the lifetime % risk to be like 25%. I guess I'm just trying to work out if I've got those numbers correct, since I don't really understand the context that well. But I also suppose it doesn't matter all that much in our case, since we do plan to spay at some point (sooner rather than later)! 



emilycn said:



It's over-complicated. That's how we do things in academia. 

Click to expand...

You can say that again! Not making me miss grad school AT ALL _


----------



## dextersmom

And I am finding that literature review you attached extremely helpful, einspanner. So thank you!


----------



## emilycn

dextersmom said:


> But lost here...
> 
> 
> 
> emilycn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what it's saying is that out of those 200,000 unspayed dogs, 2% of them developed pyometra. Of that 2% (so 4,000 dogs who ever got pyometra), 24% of them got pyometra some time before they turn 10 (so 960 of them).
> 
> 
> 
> Is that same as saying, "...out of those 200,000 unspayed dogs, 2% of them developed pyometra. Of that 2% (so 4,000 dogs who ever got pyometra), 24% of *those dogs* got pyometra some time before they turn 10 (so 960 of them)?"
> 
> Am I reading that right? But that entire 2% got pyometra. So that would mean roughly the other 76% still got pyometra... just after age 10? There's where I'm lost.
> 
> I think this is the part that I'm having trouble with, though I think I'm starting to get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So lifetime risk increases as the dog ages _because the estimated risk of pyometra increases with age.
> _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _
> So I guess it's the whole annual % risk vs. lifetime % risk that has me stumped. Everything I think I've read online says gives the annual % risk to be around 2% and the lifetime % risk to be like 25%. I guess I'm just trying to work out if I've got those numbers correct, since I don't really understand the context that well. But I also suppose it doesn't matter all that much in our case, since we do plan to spay at some point (sooner rather than later)!
> 
> 
> 
> emilycn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's over-complicated. That's how we do things in academia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can say that again! Not making me miss grad school AT ALL
> 
> _
Click to expand...

_

So point 1, you are correct---24% *of those dogs that got pyometra* got it before they were 10. Meaning that most of those dogs that got pyometra got it when they were older than 10 years. 4,000 of the 200,000 dogs in that study had pyometra. Of that 4,000, only 960 (24%) of them got it when they were younger than 10 years old. The remaining 3,040 dogs who had pyometra claims were older than 10 years old when they got it. Meaning that the remaining 196,000 of the un-neutered females in in that study never got pyometra. Which is what we would expect, because pyometra is not very prevalent, and most dogs that do get pyometra get it when they are relatively older.

On point 2, the mean lifetime risk (25%) is misleading, because there are some dogs included in that calculation who live to be 18 or even 20 years old---as the swedish study showed, 12-month risk increases with age, so if a dog of any breed lives to be that old, their risk of pyometra continues to climb with each additional year of life. It's also misleading because some breeds are more at risk than others, but they're included in the overall lifetime estimate too. If you took out the super long-lived dogs, and the dogs that seem to be particularly susceptible, I suspect that lifetime risk would be considerably less than 25%. 

MCD---the pyometra discussion is relevant to a discussion on spaying because it's a uterine infection---dogs that don't have a uterus can't get pyometra (although that's technically untrue---in all this reading I've learned that apparently uterus stumps that are left over after spaying (I have no idea what that means, because I don't know how they do the surgery) can still get infected, and thus would be diagnosed as pyometra). So spaying is both a preventative and a treatment for pyometra. In some very rare cases where the bitch is a particularly valuable contribution to the gene pool, vets have treated it with antibiotics and steroids. It's not particularly successful, though---i think I read that about 50% of dogs who get a treatment rather than a spay for pyometra will get it again. Another interesting and relevant point is that hormone-induced abortions for a mis-breeding are a substantial risk factor for developing pyometra. So if someone does decide to wait to spay, but their dog accidentally gets bred to a genetically disastrous mate and so decide to abort, that accident carries a hefty risk of getting a serious infection._


----------



## dextersmom

Got it, thank you!!   

And MCD - the way I understand it, the changes that happen during a heat (the cervix opening, the white blood cells leaving the uterus to prepare for the passage of sperm, thickening of the uterine lining, hormone levels changing, etc.) all combine to make an environment where bacteria can thrive (possibly leading to an infection aka pyometra). If a dog doesn't experience a heat, these changes don't happen, so it's unlikely they'd develop the infection. For instance, the cervix is closed if the dog is not in heat, which means bacteria can't get into the uterus like it could if it were open when a dog_ is_ in heat.


----------



## MCD

OK. I am just going to have to risk the possibility of her getting an infection from going into heat is the worst that can happen and Dharma will have to wear the barbed wire panties for a while. We will just have to be more than extra careful about other dogs at that time.(Not that Dharma is particularly happy about hanging out with most other dogs anyway.)


----------



## JALVizsla

Apologies for commenting on an old thread, but there is a lot of good information and I thought it might be beneficial to bump it up rather than creating a new thread.

I am getting a female Vizsla, and originally planned on spaying before her first heat as the majority of the research I've read and professionals I know recommend that due to the increased risk of mammary cancer. I find it really interesting/troubling, however, to read Dr. Becker's article that explains the results of the systematic review done by the Veterinary Epidemiology and Public Health Group of the Royal Veterinary College in the U.K. I am now very much reconsidering the timing of my dog's spay.

That said, this article is from 2013, so I thought it might be prudent to bring up the discussion again to see if any of you knowledgeable folks have updated research up your sleeves.

(It is probably worth mentioning that I will be spaying my dog, so like the OP, it is a question of when rather than if.)


----------



## 1stVizsla

Lyra, thx for sharing. Our pup is 16mo and I am Very Interested in hearing more about your experience with the OSS. Could you please share more. I'm especially interested in the behavioral aspects. My dog has had 2 heats so far and expecting her third around Dec. I read somewhere that the smaller females come into heat younger (she was 8 mos) and I'm wondering if they are more fertile in general; she came from an 8 or 9 pup litter herself. She had phantom press after both heats although the 2nd one was much diminished relative to the first. Although she's supposedly got good field bloodlines, she looks like shed really excel at breeding based on her behavior and physiology. Not sure what I've got here but trying to make the correct decision on spaying, when & how. 

Thanks in advance for keeping us informed on the OSS!!


----------



## lyra

There's not really much to add to be honest.

She recovered much as expected after her operation. She was back to normal after 24 hours and the biggest challenge was trying to reduce her normal activity (we mostly failed!). Lyra is a small Vizsla but in her case she only has a heat about once a year. You can tell when she is having a heat as her mood and behaviour change in the same way as any intact dog coming into heat but of course there is no bleeding. I have read that they can still get a slight discharge but that hasn't been our experience or maybe her normal 'cleaning' means we don't notice it.

The OSS hasn't changed her temperament at all which of course is to be expected. Hormonally she is unchanged, she just doesn't have a uterus any more.

As I've said before, the biggest challenge is finding a vet who can perform the procedure as it is still uncommon (although pretty similar to a full spay).

There is a Facebook group dedicated to OSS https://www.facebook.com/groups/alternativealteringinfo/. It isn't particularly active in terms of posts but there is a good file section for further info.


----------

