SynthesisScientific reports2017
Optimization of large animal MI models; a systematic analysis of control groups from preclinical studies.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intracoronary Administration of Microencapsulated HGF in a Reperfused Myocardial Infarction Swine Model.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- Anesthesia Protocols used to Create Ischemia Reperfusion Myocardial Infarcts in Swine.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2020Review
- Damage-Associated Molecular Patterns in Myocardial Infarction and Heart Transplantation: The Road to Translational Success.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
- Effects of Spaceflight and Simulated Microgravity on YAP1 Expression in Cardiovascular Progenitors: Implications for Cell-Based Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large animal models are essential for the development of novel therapeutics for myocardial infarction. To optimize translation, we need to assess the effect of experimental design on disease outcome and model experimental design to resemble the clinical course of MI. The aim of this study is therefore to systematically investigate how experimental decisions affect outcome measurements in large animal MI models. We used control animal-data from two independent meta-analyses of large animal MI models. All variables of interest were pre-defined. We performed univariable and multivariable meta-regression to analyze whether these variables influenced infarct size and ejection fraction. Our analyses incorporated 246 relevant studies. Multivariable meta-regression revealed that infarct size and cardiac function were influenced independently by choice of species, sex, co-medication, occlusion type, occluded vessel, quantification method, ischemia duration and follow-up duration. We provide strong systematic evidence that commonly used endpoints significantly depend on study design and biological variation. This makes direct comparison of different study-results difficult and calls for standardized models. Researchers should take this into account when designing large animal studies to most closely mimic the clinical course of MI and enable translational success.
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.