ArticlePloS one2015
Impact of Anesthesia Protocols on In Vivo Bioluminescent Bacteria Imaging Results.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- General anesthesia bullies the gut: a toxic relationship with dysbiosis and cognitive dysfunction.Psychopharmacology · 2022Review
- Evaluation of Leishmanization UsingFrontiers in immunology · 2020Article
- Options and Limitations in Clinical Investigation of Bacterial Biofilms.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infectious murine models greatly benefit from optical imaging using bioluminescent bacteria to non-invasively and repeatedly follow in vivo bacterial infection. In this context, one of the most critical parameters is the bioluminescence sensitivity to reliably detect the smallest number of bacteria. Another critical point is the anesthetic approaches that have been demonstrated to impact the bioluminescence flux emission in studies with luciferase-transfected tumor cells. However, this impact has never been assessed on bacteria bioluminescent models. To this end, we investigated the effects of four anesthesia protocols on the bioluminescence flux in a central venous catheter murine model (SKH1-hr(hr) mice) infected by a bioluminescent S. aureus Xen36 strain. Bioluminescence imaging was performed on mice anesthetized by either ketamine/xylazine (with or without oxygen supplementation), or isoflurane carried with air or oxygen. Total flux emission was determined in vivo daily for 3 days and ex vivo at the end of the study together with a CFU counting of the biofilm in the catheter. Bioluminescence flux differences appear between the different anesthetic protocols. Using a ketamine/xylazine anesthesia (with air), bacteria detection was impossible since the bioluminescence signal remains in the background signal. Mice anesthetized with isoflurane and oxygen led to a signal significantly higher to the background all along the kinetics. The use of isoflurane in air presents a bioluminescence signal similar to the use of ketamine/xylazine with oxygen. These data highlight the importance of oxygen to improve bioluminescence flux by bacteria with isoflurane as well as with ketamine/xylazine anesthetics. As a conclusion, we recommend the use of isoflurane anesthetic with oxygen to increase the bioluminescence sensitivity in this kind of study.
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.