Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29907166›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2018

Comparison of Serial Blood Collection by Facial Vein and Retrobulbar Methods in C57BL/6 Mice.

Jennifer R Frohlich, Christina N Alarcón, Camille R Toarmino, Anna K Sunseri, Tyler M Hockman

Abstract readClinical Trial, Veterinary
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A Comparison of Blood Collection Techniques in Mice and their Effects on Welfare.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  4. Improving the Quality of EDTA-treated Blood Specimens from Mice.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. BioMed research international · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

5 authors.

Jennifer R FrohlichAnimal Care Program, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, California, Office of Laboratory Animal Care, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, California;, Email: jennifer.frohlich@gmail.com.
Christina N AlarcónBiomedical Sciences Program, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Camille R ToarminoDepartment of Psychology, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, California, BioTelemetry Research, Rochester, New York.
Anna K SunseriAnimal Care Program, University of California-San Diego, Department of Animal Resources, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California.
Tyler M HockmanAnimal Care Program, University of California-San Diego, La Jolla, California, Division of Laboratory Animal Services, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia.

Funding

UCSD Research Training Program for VeterinariansT32OD017863 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI ERNST, PETER B., SIGURDSON, CHRISTINA · 2014 to 2023
$2.0M
NIH HHS T32 OD017863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many biomedical research protocols for mouse models involve serial blood collection and analysis. Two common techniques for serial blood collection in this species are the retrobulbar (RB, also called retroorbital) and facial vein (FV) methods. However, previous studies comparing these methods typically evaluated collection at a maximum of 2 time points. Here we compared hematologic values, adverse clinical effects, and histopathologic lesions in mice bled either once or serially (6 times) by using the FV or RB method. Mice (n = 48) were divided into 4 groups: single FV, single RB, serial FV and serial RB. Mice in the single-collection groups underwent a single blood collection by the indicated method, whereas those in the serial-collection groups were sampled once weekly for 6 consecutive weeks. All animals were euthanized and necropsied 2 wk after their last blood collection. Compared with all other groups, the serial FV group experienced more serious clinical adverse events, including 33% mortality, convulsions, head tilt, and hemorrhage from the ear canal and nares. In addition, mice in the FV groups had a significantly greater acute body weight loss compared with mice in the RB groups. Histologically, mice in both serial-collection groups had an increased incidence of tissue lesions compared with their respective single-collection groups. Importantly, only mice in the serial FV group had life-threatening histopathologic lesions, including cerebral hemorrhage or ischemia. Given these data, we conclude that serial blood collection in mice causes increased incidence of tissue damage compared with single sampling, and serial blood collection by the FV method causes substantial morbidity and mortality compared with the RB method.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlood Specimen CollectionLaboratory Animal ScienceMiceMice, Inbred C57BLOrbit

Identifiers

PMID29907166
PMCPMC6059217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.