Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26504843›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2015

Comparative Analysis of Methods to Induce Myocardial Infarction in a Closed-Chest Rabbit Model.

Marc-Antoine Isorni, Amaury Casanova, Julie Piquet, Valérie Bellamy, Charly Pignon, Etienne Puymirat, Philippe Menasche

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2018
    Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A novel method of standardized myocardial infarction in aged rabbits.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Marc-Antoine IsorniDepartment of Cardiology, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, France ; Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.
Amaury CasanovaINSERM U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, Paris, France.
Julie PiquetINSERM U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, Paris, France.
Valérie BellamyINSERM U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, Paris, France.
Charly PignonNational Veterinary School of Alfort, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Etienne PuymiratDepartment of Cardiology, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, France ; Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France ; INSERM U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, Paris, France.
Philippe MenascheUniversité Paris Descartes, Paris, France ; INSERM U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, Paris, France ; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, France.
Paris Cardiovascular Research Center · FRÉcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort · FRHôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou · FRInserm · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop a rabbit model of closed-chest catheter-induced myocardial infarction. Background. Limitations of rodent and large animal models justify the search for clinically relevant alternatives.

methodsMicrocatheterization of the heart was performed in 47 anesthetized 3-4 kg New Zealand rabbits to test five techniques of myocardial ischemia: free coils (n = 4), interlocking coils (n = 4), thrombogenic gelatin sponge (n = 4), balloon occlusion (n = 4), and alcohol injection (n = 8). In order to limit ventricular fibrillation, an antiarrhythmic protocol was implemented, with beta-blockers/amiodarone before and xylocaine infusion during the procedure. Clinical, angiographic, and echographic data were gathered. End points included demonstration of vessel occlusion (TIMI flow grades 0 and 1 on the angiogram), impairment of left ventricular function at 2 weeks after procedure (by echocardiography), and pathologically confirmed myocardial infarction.

resultsThe best arterial access was determined to be through the right carotid artery. The internal mammary guiding catheter 4-Fr was selected as the optimal device for selective intracoronary injection. Free coils deployed prematurely and tended to prolapse into the aorta. Interlocking coils did not deploy completely and failed to provide reliable results. Gelatin sponge was difficult to handle, adhered to the catheter, and could not be clearly visualized by fluoroscopy. Balloon occlusion yielded inconsistent results. Alcohol injection was the most efficient and reproducible method for inducing myocardial infarction (4 out of 6 animals), the extent of which could be fine-tuned by using a coaxial balloon catheter as a microcatheter (0.52 mm) to achieve a superselective injection of 0.2 mL of alcohol. This approach resulted in a 20% decrease in LVEF and infarcted myocardium was confirmed histologically.

conclusionsBy following a stepwise approach, a minimally invasive, effective, and reproducible rabbit model of catheter-induced myocardial infarction has been developed which addresses the limitations of rodent experiments while avoiding the logistical and cost issues associated with large animal models.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalMyocardial InfarctionAnimalsCardiac CatheterizationEchocardiographyMaleMyocardiumRabbits

Identifiers

PMID26504843
PMCPMC4609376
OpenAlexW1863469557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.