Is the mortality rate for pet surgery higher than that of human surgery?

A few years ago, my cat got sick and required a hysterectomy. From the call to the veterinarian to set up the surgery to picking up the cat afterward, about one week passed. The cost was 400$.

Now, I’m thinking that 400$ is much below what it costs for a human hysterectomy. If the higher costs raises the survival rate and reduces associated problems, that can be quite worthwhile. Does it, though?

I’m reminded of pet drugs which are very much like human drugs but a lot cheaper. Could this be another such instance?

If so, what are the reasons for it, good and bad?

I don’t know. But there is more money spent on humans, and more investigation into the surgeries and practitioners involved in their deaths. Humans also opt for more surgeries that are less critical for survival. Humans provide more information to their doctors to aid diagnosis and treatment. Much more is known about the treatment of humans than any other species, and doctors that work on humans concentrate on their species completely. Finally, humans live much longer than most other animals, and so are less likely to die in any given time period for that reason alone.

I’d think human surgery would HAVE to be less lethal on average.

Pretty much my thinking. In other words, Fluffy and Arfy can’t tell you when it starts to hurt, where it hurts, and how badly. By the time you’ve noticed, the options have dwindled or more damage has been done.

It would be unsurprising that pet mortality is higher.