ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2026
Establishing selection criteria for male New Zealand white rabbits in interventional radiology research using organ volumes and vessel diameters.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNew Zealand White (NZW) rabbits are widely used in interventional radiology research due to their suitability for human-sized treatment and imaging equipment, offering high translational potential. This study aims to define selection criteria for rabbits by correlating body weight (BW) and age with abdominal organ and vessel dimensions measured on cross-sectional imaging. MATERIALS AND
methodsComputed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging scans of 80 male NZW rabbits were analyzed using 3D Slicer to measure abdominal organ volumes and vessel diameters. Additionally, an in-house nnU-Net was built for liver volumetry and validated against manual segmentations. Imaging-based measurements were confirmed by gross anatomy in five animals. Statistics included normality testing and Pearson correlation.
resultsBW ranged from 2.0 to 4.5 kg (median [IQR]: 3.5 [2.9-3.8]) and age from 10.0 to 24.9 weeks (17.7 [15.0-21.4]); age correlated strongly with BW (p < 0.001). Organ volumes (liver, both kidneys) correlated with BW and age (all p < 0.001), respectively. Additionally, several vessel diameters (left common and internal iliac arteries, inferior vena cava, right common carotid artery) significantly correlated with BW and age, while the celiac trunk (p = 0.010), common hepatic (p = 0.011), and right renal artery (p = 0.031) correlated with BW only. The liver segmentation model achieved a Dice Similarity Coefficient of 0.91.
conclusionBW and age in NZW rabbits correlate with both organ volumes and large vessels relevant to interventional procedures, supporting the use of biometric data as selection criteria to improve standardization, reduce complications, and enhance preclinical research quality. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Weight- and age-based selection of NZW rabbits improves anatomical suitability for image-guided interventions, enhancing technical success and reproducibility. It may reduce complications and dropouts, avoiding false attribution of adverse events to the technique rather than biometric unsuitability. KEY POINTS: Lack of standardized selection criteria in the VX2 rabbit model increases procedural risks and impairs reproducibility in interventional radiology research. Biometric data correlate with organ and vessel dimensions, enabling estimations of anatomical suitability for image-guided procedures in interventional radiological research. This study establishes anatomical reference data providing a quantitative basis to standardize and refine future VX2 rabbit research.
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.