ArticlePloS one2013
Impact of thoracic surgery on cardiac morphology and function in small animal models of heart disease: a cardiac MRI study in rats.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Receiver operating characteristic-derived thresholds for early validation of myocardial injury in a rat ischemia-reperfusion model.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Stroke-induced chronic systolic dysfunction driven by sympathetic overactivity.Annals of neurology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical procedures in small animal models of heart disease might evoke alterations in cardiac morphology and function. The aim of this study was to reveal and quantify such potential artificial early or long term effects in vivo, which might account for a significant bias in basic cardiovascular research, and, therefore, could potentially question the meaning of respective studies.
methodsFemale Wistar rats (n = 6 per group) were matched for weight and assorted for sham left coronary artery ligation or control. Cardiac morphology and function was then investigated in vivo by cine magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla 1 and 8 weeks after the surgical procedure. The time course of metabolic and inflammatory blood parameters was determined in addition.
resultsCompared to healthy controls, rats after sham surgery showed a lower body weight both 1 week (267.5±10.6 vs. 317.0±11.3 g, n<0.05) and 8 weeks (317.0±21.1 vs. 358.7±22.4 g, n<0.05) after the intervention. Left and right ventricular morphology and function were not different in absolute measures in both groups 1 week after surgery. However, there was a confined difference in several cardiac parameters normalized to the body weight (bw), such as myocardial mass (2.19±0.30/0.83±0.13 vs. 1.85±0.22/0.70±0.07 mg left/right per g bw, p<0.05), or enddiastolic ventricular volume (1.31±0.36/1.21±0.31 vs. 1.14±0.20/1.07±0.17 µl left/right per g bw, p<0.05). Vice versa, after 8 weeks, cardiac masses, volumes, and output showed a trend for lower values in sham operated rats compared to controls in absolute measures (782.2±57.2/260.2±33.2 vs. 805.9±84.8/310.4±48.5 mg, p<0.05 for left/right ventricular mass), but not normalized to body weight. Matching these findings, blood testing revealed only minor inflammatory but prolonged metabolic changes after surgery not related to cardiac disease.
conclusionCardio-thoracic surgical procedures in experimental myocardial infarction cause distinct alterations upon the global integrity of the organism, which in the long term also induce circumscribed repercussions on cardiac morphology and function. This impact has to be considered when analyzing data from respective animal studies and transferring these findings to conditions in patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.