Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29768953›Full record

ArticleLaboratory animals2019

Baseline performance of the ischaemic button model for induction of adhesions in laboratory rats.

Elwin Hh Mommers, Liu Hong, Audrey Jongen, Nicole D Bouvy

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Laboratory animals, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elwin Hh MommersDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Liu HongDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Audrey JongenDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5743-5799
Nicole D BouvyDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ischaemic button model is frequently used for the induction of adhesions in laboratory rats. Male rats are often used because of the common belief that the peritesticular (intra-abdominal) fat in males facilitates adhesion formation, although this theory is not evidence based. Comparing the model's performance in both sexes is an important aspect of refining animal experiments. The aim of this study is to compare baseline performance of the modified ischaemic button model in both male and female rats. Follow-up was 1 week and noted endpoints were intra-abdominal adhesion formation and differences in welfare assessment. A total of 192 ischaemic buttons (96 male/96 female) were created in 24 Wistar Han rats (12 male/12 female). After 1 week of follow-up, 93 buttons survived in the male group (96.9%) compared with 91 in the female group (94.8%) (p = 0.409). In the male group, 85 out of 93 (91.4%) buttons induced adhesions compared with 84 out of 91 (92.3%) in the female group (p = 0.881). All but one animal had a Zühlke score of 3. There were no clinically relevant differences in welfare scores. Male animals increased in weight significantly faster compared to females (p < 0.001), after correcting for physiological growth. The ischaemic button model resulted in equal quality and quantity of intra-abdominal adhesions in both male and female Wistar Han rats. Both male and female Wistar Han rats are suitable for the induction of experimental adhesions in the ischaemic button model.

Indexed as

AnimalsDisease Models, AnimalFemaleIschemiaMaleRandom AllocationRatsRats, WistarTissue Adhesionsadhesionsischaemic button modellaboratory ratsmale and female comparison

Identifiers

PMID29768953
PMCPMC6376654
OpenAlexW2803799556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.