ArticleVeterinary world2015
The effect of gabapentin and pregabalin on intestinal incision wound healing in rabbits.
Article in Veterinary world, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Gabapentin after Oral and Subcutaneous Administration in Black-tailed Prairie Dogs (Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2020Article
- Changes in histopathology and cytokeratin AE1/AE3 expression in skin graft with different time on Indonesian local cats.Veterinary world · 2017Article
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the macroscopic and histologic effects of pregabalin (PG) gabapentin (GB) on longitudinal intestinal wound healing in New Zealand rabbits. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe animals were divided into three groups randomly; the control group (n=6), PG group (n=6) and GB group (n=6). All animals were premedicated with xylazine HCI, 5 mg/kg i.m. and general anaesthesia was performed by ketamine HCI 50 mg/kg i.m injection. A 4 cm incision in the caecum through median laparotomy was achieved under aseptic surgery. Intestinal wound was closed with double-sutured. All animals were received parenteral antibiotic treatment for 5 days. PG and GB groups were treated by PG (30 mg/kg, oral, daily) and GB (30 mg/kg, oral, daily) for 10 days respectively. Control group did not receive any treatment. The animals were euthanized on day 10 and the caecum was examined by laparotomy. Adhesion formation was observed, and tissue samples were taken from suture lines for histologic examination. Cellular infiltration (polymorphonuclear white blood cells and mononuclear cells), accumulation of connective tissue, vascularization and extent of necrosis were evaluated and scored separately for each of mucosal, submucosal, muscular and serosal layers of caecum.
resultsAdhesions were more severe in the GB group compared to other groups. No statistically significant differences were detected among the three groups about the wound healing.
conclusionIt was suggested that the use of gabapentinoids had no significant effect on wound healing in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery and further studies with treatment periods longer than 10 days are needed.
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.