ArticleLaboratory animal research2021
Comparison of murine retroorbital plexus and facial vein blood collection to mitigate animal ethics issues.
Article in Laboratory animal research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparable immunogenicity from murine blood collection methods in intranasal gonococcal vaccination with ACP and MtrE supports refinement of preclinical vaccine studies.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- GLP1 alleviates oleic acid-propelled lipocalin-2 generation by tumor-infiltrating CD8Cellular & molecular immunology · 2025Article
- Anandamide as a Therapeutic Target for Alleviating Neuropathic Pain and Inflammation in Rat Models.Current neurovascular research · 2025Article
- Individualized Housing Modifies the Immune-Endocrine System in CD1 Adult Male Mice.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- A Comparison of Blood Collection Techniques in Mice and their Effects on Welfare.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood collection is an important procedure used in animal experiments. Blood collection methods that reduce pain, injury, and stress in experimental animals are important with regard to animal ethics. Various comparative studies of blood collection methods have been reported; however, there are no comparative studies on serial blood collection considering animal ethics. To suggest simple methods that minimize pain during serial blood collection, we compared the retroorbital plexus (RP) and facial vein (FV) blood collection methods performed by both experienced and novice groups. The experienced and novice groups collected up to 0.4 mL of blood via the RP and FV methods every second day for 2 weeks. After blood collection, all mice were evaluated by corticosterone concentrations for stress, hematological, immunological, and histological analyses.
resultsWe found that the FV methods reduced the collection time, pain, distress, tissue damage and lasting harms without anesthesia. Corticosterone concentrations in the peripheral blood were decreased in mice subjected FV methods compare with those subjected to RP methods. The proportion of granulocytes and monocytes, such as macrophages in the peripheral blood and spleen, was decreased in mice subjected to FV methods compared with that in mice subjected to RP methods in both experienced and novice groups. White blood cells were infiltrated in RP areas with severe tissue damage and inflammation.
conclusionsWith respect to animal ethics, we suggest that the FV method, a simple and fast technique that can easily be performed by both experienced and novice researchers, is suitable for serial blood collection.
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.