ArticleLaboratory animals2014
A model describing the use of a bronchial blocking device and a sheathed bronchoscope for pulmonary aspiration studies in the Gottingen minipig.
Article in Laboratory animals, 2014. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lung injury caused by aspiration of organophosphorus insecticide and gastric contents in pigs.Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2022Article
- Respiratory complications of organophosphorus nerve agent and insecticide poisoning. Implications for respiratory and critical care.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The administration of test substances into a single lung, or lung lobe, allows the remaining untreated lung to act as an experimental control and effectively halves the number of animals required in a given experiment. It reduces the likelihood of early fatal pulmonary failure when noxious substances are studied which may lessen the need for replacement animals. However, the ease of substance administration and the subsequent analysis of its effects, for example by bronchoalveolar lavage or bronchoscopy, depend critically on the size of the animal model. The advantages of using minipigs; ease of handling, reduced housing requirements, genetic homogeneity, etc. are reduced if their diminutive size makes lung studies difficult. This article describes the use of a bronchial blocking device and a sheathed bronchoscope which enabled sterile endobronchial substance administration in Göttingen minipigs, and allowed pulmonary aspiration studies to be conducted with each animal acting as its own control.
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.