Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28429311›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine experimental2017

Improving animal welfare using continuous nalbuphine infusion in a long-term rat model of sepsis.

Victor Jeger, Mattia Arrigo, Florian F Hildenbrand, Daniel Müller, Paulin Jirkof, Till Hauffe, Burkhardt Seifert, Margarete Arras, Donat R Spahn, Dominique Bettex and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Victor JegerInstitute of Anaesthesiology, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mattia ArrigoDepartment of Cardiology, University Heart Centre, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Florian F HildenbrandDepartment of Medicine, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Daniel MüllerInstitute of Clinical Chemistry, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Paulin JirkofDepartment of Surgery, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Till HauffeInstitute of Anaesthesiology, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Burkhardt SeifertEpidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), Department of Biostatistics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Margarete ArrasDepartment of Surgery, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Donat R SpahnInstitute of Anaesthesiology, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Dominique BettexInstitute of Anaesthesiology, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alain RudigerInstitute of Anaesthesiology, University of Zurich and University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. alain.rudiger@usz.ch.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis research relies on animal models to investigate the mechanisms of the dysregulated host response to infection. Animal welfare concerns request the use of potent analgesics for the Refinement of existing sepsis models, according to the 3Rs principle. Nevertheless, adequate analgesia is often missing, partly because the effects of analgesics in this particular condition are unknown. We evaluated the use of nalbuphine, an opioid with kappa agonistic and mu antagonistic effects, in rats with and without experimental sepsis.

methodsMale Wistar rats were anesthetized with isoflurane and instrumented with a venous line for drug administration. Arterial cannulation allowed for blood pressure measurements and blood sampling in short-term experiments of non-septic animals. Nalbuphine (or placebo) was administered intravenously at a dose of 1 mg/kg/h. Long-term (48 h) experiments in awake septic animals included repetitive clinical scoring with the Rat Grimace Scale and continuous heart rate monitoring by telemetry. Sepsis was induced by intraperitoneal injection of faecal slurry. Nalbuphine plasma levels were measured by liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry.

resultsIn anesthetized healthy animals, nalbuphine led to a significant reduction of respiratory rate, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure during short-term experiments. In awake septic animals, a continuous nalbuphine infusion did not affect heart rate but significantly improved the values of the Rat Grimace Scale. Nalbuphine plasma concentrations remained stable between 4 and 24 h of continuous infusion in septic rats.

conclusionsIn anaesthetised rats, nalbuphine depresses respiratory rate, heart rate, and blood pressure. In awake animals, nalbuphine analgesia improves animal welfare during sepsis.

Indexed as

3RAnalgesiaAnimal welfareFaecal peritonitisNalbuphineRat modelSepsis

Identifiers

PMID28429311
PMCPMC5399012
OpenAlexW2605774146

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.