SynthesisAmerican journal of hypertension2022
An Evaluation of Cardiac Health in the Spontaneously Hypertensive Rat Colony: Implications of Evolutionary Driven Increases in Concentric Hypertrophy.
Synthesis in American journal of hypertension, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diurnal behavioral outcomes and BBB integrity in adult male SHR and WKY rats.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Differences in mRNA Expression of Selected Cytochrome P450, Transporters and Nuclear Receptors Among Various Rat Models of Metabolic Syndrome.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Article
- Srebf and Runx3 regulate hepatic HMG-CoA reductase and intracellular cholesterol under hypoxia.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2025Article
- Sexual dimorphism in animal models of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2025Review
- Animal models of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF): from metabolic pathobiology to drug discovery.Acta pharmacologica Sinica · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Spontaneously Hypertensive Rat (SHR) Colony was established in 1963 and is the most commonly used rodent model for studying heart failure (HF). Ideally, animal models should recapitulate the clinical disease as closely as possible. Any drift in a genetic model may create a new model that no longer adequately represents the human pathology. Further, instability overtime may lead to conflicting data between laboratories and/or irreproducible results. While systolic blood pressure (SBP) is closely monitored during inbreeding, the sequelae of HF (e.g., cardiac hypertrophy) are not. Thus, the object of this review was to investigate whether the hypertension-induced sequelae of HF in the SHR have remained stable after decades of inbreeding.
methodsA systematic review was performed to evaluate indices of cardiovascular health in the SHR over the past 60 years. For post hoc statistical analyses, studies were separated into 2 cohorts: Initial (mid to late 1900s) and Current (early 2000s to present) Colony SHRs. Wistar-Kyoto rats (WKY) were used as controls.
resultsSBP was consistent between Initial and Current Colony SHRs. However, Current Colony SHRs presented with increased concentric hypertrophy (i.e., elevated heart weight and posterior wall thickness) while cardiac output remained consistent. Since these changes were not observed in the WKY controls, cardiac-derived changes in Current Colony SHRs were unlikely due to differences in environmental conditions.
conclusionsTogether, these data firmly establish a cardiac-based phenotypic shift in the SHR model and provide important insights into the beneficial function of concentric hypertrophy in hypertension-induced HF.
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.