ArticleAmerican journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology2017
A novel method of standardized myocardial infarction in aged rabbits.
Article in American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection.Basic research in cardiology · 2018Guideline
- Guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2018Guideline
- A novel method for the percutaneous induction of myocardial infarction by occlusion of small coronary arteries in the rabbit.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2024Article
- Myofibroblast senescence promotes arrhythmogenic remodeling in the aged infarcted rabbit heart.eLife · 2023Article
- Large animal models of cardiac ischemia-reperfusion injury: Where are we now?Zoological research · 2023Review
- Myocardial infarction from a tissue engineering and regenerative medicine point of view: A comprehensive review on models and treatments.Biophysics reviews · 2022Review
- Current Status and Limitations of Myocardial Infarction Large Animal Models in Cardiovascular Translational Research.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Beating Rate Variability of Isolated Mammal Sinoatrial Node Tissue: Insight Into Its Contribution to Heart Rate Variability.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Enhancing Autophagy Diminishes Aberrant CaFrontiers in physiology · 2019Article
- Statistical considerations in reporting cardiovascular research.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2018Article
- A Universal Scaling Relation for Defining Power Spectral Bands in Mammalian Heart Rate Variability Analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The incidence of both myocardial infarction (MI) and sudden cardiac death increases with age. Here, we describe the development of a minimally invasive large animal model of MI that can be applied to young or aged animals. We demonstrate that rabbit coronary anatomy is highly variable, more so than described in previous literature. In this work, we categorize the coronary pattern of 37 young rabbits and 64 aged rabbits. Aged rabbits had a higher degree of branching from the left main coronary artery. Standardizing the model across age cohorts required a new approach, targeting an area of myocardium rather than a specific vessel. Here, we present a method for achieving a reproducible infarct size, one that yielded a consistent scar encompassing ~30% of the apical left ventricular free wall. The model's consistency allowed for more valid comparisons of MI sequelae between age cohorts.
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.