Foal without a suckling reflex and with severe joint problems – a practical case

According to the owner, after birth the foal did not have a normal suckle reflex or drive to nurse and was unable to suck normally from the mare.

The situation was further complicated by the fact that the mare could not initially be milked normally. In the retrospective interview, the owner recalled that the mare retained her milk for approximately two days before letting it down. Because of these combined problems, it is likely that the foal did not receive the usual amount of colostrum during the first hours after birth, although the exact amount and timing cannot be reconstructed.

The foal later began nursing, but marked joint problems subsequently developed. According to the owner, one of the front knees became markedly swollen first, and problems later also appeared in a hind limb.

Information about the first hours and days after birth is based on the owner’s retrospective recollection. No data are available on the amount of colostrum ingested, serum IgG measurement or other tests that could objectively assess passive transfer of maternal antibodies.

According to the owner, the foal was examined by a veterinarian. The owner recalls that antibiotic treatment was mentioned, but that the veterinarian also expressed a very guarded prognosis regarding the foal’s recovery. The preserved interview does not allow us to confirm whether antibiotic treatment was actually started.

The owner also reports that the foal received pain-relieving and anti-inflammatory treatment by injection. In his observation, the foal’s condition improved temporarily while the medication was taking effect, but the pronounced problems returned as the effect wore off. The names of the medications, doses used and exact course of treatment are not documented.

The interview also does not confirm that the veterinarian formally recommended euthanasia. What is documented is the owner’s account that the veterinarian did not expect a reliable recovery and that the prognosis was uncertain.

Based on the overall description of the case, one possible retrospective clinical explanation is septic arthritis or septic polyarthritis associated with neonatal infection. This possibility is consistent with the combination of early nursing difficulties, probably inadequate early colostrum intake, and the later development of marked pain, swelling and involvement of several joints. In foals with sepsis, infection can spread through the bloodstream to the joints, while inadequate transfer of maternal antibodies from colostrum is an important risk factor for neonatal sepsis.

Septic arthritis is not a confirmed diagnosis in this case. No veterinary report, serum IgG measurement, synovial fluid analysis, microbiological culture or diagnostic imaging is available that could retrospectively confirm or exclude such a diagnosis. An absent or reduced suckle reflex on its own also does not prove inadequate passive transfer and may itself be part of the clinical presentation of an ill neonatal foal.

According to the owner, one of the front knees became markedly swollen first. By the time of the retrospective interview, he no longer remembered which side was affected. Problems later also developed in a hind limb, where he described involvement around a joint and extending upwards along the leg.

The problems were not limited to swelling. The owner describes very pronounced pain and severe difficulty getting up. According to his account, the foal was at times so affected by pain that it appeared afraid to attempt standing again, and it occasionally had to be helped up carefully.

A deep bedding was provided in the stable to make lying down and getting up less demanding. The foal was also placed on pasture, where it had to move to some extent, as the owner wanted to avoid prolonged inactivity and further loss of strength.

The owner also described an adapted way of nursing. Because of the limb problems, the foal raised mainly the front part of its body while keeping the hindquarters lower. According to the owner, the mare adjusted her position so that the foal could still nurse despite its limited mobility.

The exact anatomical joints involved, the degree of swelling and the extent of functional impairment were not objectively measured. The description of severity and progression is based on the owner’s retrospective account.

The owner decided to use Smrekovit on his own initiative and not on the veterinarian’s recommendation. He used Smrekovit Ekstra in 150 mL containers and applied it directly to the affected and painful areas.

According to his account, he mainly applied it to the swollen front knee, the affected area of the hind limb, and other areas where the foal appeared painful or rubbed itself because of the problems. The exact frequency of application and the amount used per application were not recorded.

The use was not short-term. The owner describes regular use over several months, and recalls applying the product to one of the affected joints for approximately eight to nine months.

The returned packaging provides an important supporting piece of documentation: the owner later physically returned 47 empty 150 mL containers of Smrekovit Ekstra, which were exchanged for four full containers. This provides direct material support for the reported extensive and prolonged use of the product.

Forty-seven containers have a combined nominal volume of 7.05 L, but the returned packaging alone cannot demonstrate that the entire contents of all containers were used exclusively on this foal. We therefore do not treat this figure as a precisely measured amount used on the animal.

Current general guidance on the use of Smrekovit products in animals is presented separately in the guidance for use in animals. This retrospective case describes the owner’s actual use and should not be interpreted as treatment instructions for similar conditions.

Despite the severe problems, according to the owner the foal survived the neonatal period and continued to grow. Difficulties with movement and the joints persisted for several months, requiring adapted care, assistance with standing and encouragement to move.

The economic context is also relevant when interpreting the final outcome. The foal was being raised for meat production, so the owner’s aim was not to maintain it long term as a sport or breeding horse, but to raise it to an age and condition at which it could be sent for slaughter.

The owner believes that prolonged pain and restricted mobility caused the foal to grow and gain weight more slowly. He therefore reported that there was less meat at slaughter than he would have expected from a normally developing foal. No objective data on body weight, daily weight gain or the economic value of this loss are available.

According to his recollection, the foal improved somewhat towards the end of the period. The interview does not allow the timing or magnitude of this improvement, or complete resolution of individual joint swellings, to be determined precisely.

At approximately nine months of age, the foal was sent for slaughter. The owner reported that a veterinarian or inspector at the facility asked why the animal was in such a condition. According to his account, the internal organs were considered healthy and the meat was described as very good.

The owner also commented that, from his perspective, prolonged antibiotic treatment could have further complicated the later use of the animal for meat. This represents the owner’s own reasoning about treatment and the economic context of production, not a documented veterinary decision or evidence that antibiotics were withheld for this reason.

Information about reduced growth, meat yield and findings at slaughter is based on the owner’s retrospective account. No written body-weight data, economic valuation, or official slaughterhouse or veterinary report is available, so these statements cannot be independently verified.

The most notable aspect of this case is the contrast between the very severe initial and prolonged clinical course and the fact that the foal was nevertheless raised to approximately nine months of age. The owner describes marked pain, swelling of several joints and major difficulty standing, together with some gradual improvement towards the end of the period.

The clinical description is compatible with the possibility of a severe neonatal infectious process, including septic arthritis or polyarthritis, but such a diagnosis is not confirmed by the available documentation. The case therefore cannot be considered evidence of the treatment course of confirmed septic arthritis.

Smrekovit was also not the only measure used. The owner provided intensive supportive care, including deep bedding, assistance with standing, facilitating nursing, regular observation and encouraging movement. According to his account, the foal also received pain-relieving and anti-inflammatory veterinary treatment.

Prolonged use of Smrekovit Ekstra is well supported in this case by the owner’s account and the large number of returned empty containers. However, the temporal association between product use and improvement does not demonstrate that Smrekovit caused the improvement or enabled the animal to survive. The course may also have been influenced by the natural evolution of the disease, veterinary treatment, nutrition, supportive care and other unknown factors.

The case is therefore best understood as a retrospectively documented account of very prolonged and intensive local use of the product in a foal with severe multi-joint problems, rather than as evidence of efficacy for a specific veterinary diagnosis.

What is directly documented

• An audio recording of the retrospective interview with the owner, dated 22 September 2026, together with an edited transcript.
• 47 physically returned empty 150 mL containers of Smrekovit Ekstra, which were exchanged for four full containers.
• Direct information from the manufacturer regarding the return of the containers and its connection with the described case.

What is based on the owner’s account

• difficulties with nursing and early colostrum intake;
• development of marked swelling and pain affecting several joints;
• difficulty standing and the supportive care provided;
• veterinary treatment and the temporary effect of injectable therapy;
• local use of Smrekovit Ekstra over several months;
• some gradual improvement towards the end of the period;
• poorer weight gain and reduced meat yield;
• findings reportedly made by the inspector or veterinarian at slaughter.

Which data are missing

• the veterinary medical record or written veterinary report;
• a confirmed diagnosis;
• serum IgG measurement or another objective assessment of passive transfer;
• synovial fluid analysis, microbiological culture or other laboratory diagnostics;
• radiographs, ultrasound or other diagnostic imaging;
• photographs or video recordings of the clinical course;
• serial body-weight and growth measurements;
• the exact regimen of Smrekovit Ekstra application;
• a written slaughterhouse or veterinary report from the time of slaughter.

Because of these limitations, it is not possible to retrospectively confirm the exact diagnosis, objectively quantify the degree of improvement, or separate the effects of the individual measures used. It is also impossible to determine how the case would have progressed without Smrekovit Ekstra.

The returned packaging provides relatively strong material support for the large scale of product use, but does not by itself prove that the contents of all 47 containers were used entirely and exclusively on this foal.