ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2026
Suitability for lacrimal duct research: anatomical and histological evidence favors the rabbit model over the rat.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the histological and anatomical characteristics of the lacrimal duct system (LDS) in rabbits and rats and compare with that in humans to establish a suitable animal for LDS studies.
methodsNew Zealand white rabbits (1.8-2 kg) and SD rats (250-300 g) were selected. Following tests were executed on their LDS, including anatomical measurements; computed tomographic dacryocystography; hematoxylin and eosin, Masson's trichrome, Periodic Acid-Schiff staining, and scanning electron microscope.
resultsAlthough there were anatomical similarities between the rats and humans in LDS, the size of LDS was too small and the epithelial types differed from that of humans in LDS. The rabbit only had a lower lacrimal punctum and a lacrimal canaliculus, while they had the same types of lacrimal epithelium as human's and the size was suitable for clinical probing and intubation.
conclusionHistologically, the lacrimal canaliculi of both rabbits and rats resemble those of humans, making both species applicable for biological studies targeting the lacrimal canaliculi. Nevertheless, the epithelial types of the lacrimal sac and nasolacrimal duct in rats differ significantly from humans, whereas those in rabbits are consistent with humans. Therefore, rabbits are more appropriate for biological research involving the nasolacrimal duct and lacrimal sac.
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.