Laboratory animals
-
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) after the induction of cardiac arrest (CA) has been studied in mice and rats. The anatomical and physiological parameters of the cardiopulmonary system of these two species have been defined during experimental studies and are comparable with those of humans. ⋯ Furthermore, the efficacy of several drugs, such as adrenaline (epinephrine), vasopressin and nitroglycerin, has been evaluated for use in CA in these small animal models. The purpose of these studies is not only to increase the rate of survival of CA victims, but also to improve their quality of life by reducing damage to their vital organs after CA and during CPR.
-
Comparative Study
The haemodynamic and catecholamine response to xenon/remifentanil anaesthesia in Beagle dogs.
The noble gas xenon seems to have minimal cardiovascular side-effects and so may be an ideal anaesthetic agent when investigating cardiovascular physiology. In comparison with standard modern anaesthetics, we investigated the haemodynamic and hormonal effects of xenon in Beagle dogs. After a 30 min baseline period, anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with either (1) 1.2% isoflurane/70% nitrous oxide (N(2)O), (2) 0.8% isoflurane/0.5 microg/kg/min remifentanil or (3) 63% xenon/0.5 microg/kg/min remifentanil (n = 6 per group). ⋯ A simultaneous increase in endogenous adrenaline and noradrenaline concentrations could only be observed in the xenon/remifentanil group, whereas angiotensin II and vasopressin concentrations increased in all groups. In conclusion, xenon/remifentanil anaesthesia maintains MAP but reduces heart rate and CO and is associated with a considerable stimulation of vasopressor hormones in Beagle dogs. Therefore, xenon/remifentanil exerts a new quality of adverse haemodynamic effects different from volatile anaesthetics and may not perform better during studies of cardiovascular physiology.
-
The use of animals in biomedical and other research presents an ethical dilemma: we do not want to lose scientific benefits, nor do we want to cause laboratory animals to suffer. Scientists often refer to the potential human benefits of animal models to justify their use. However, even if this is accepted, it still needs to be argued that the same benefits could not have been achieved with a mitigated impact on animal welfare. ⋯ If the reference in scientific publications reflects the actual application of refinement, researchers do not follow the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement) principle. While in some cases, it is clear that less-than-optimal techniques were used, we recognize that scientists may apply refinement without referring to it; however, if they do not include such information in publications, it suggests they find it less relevant. Journal publishing policy could play an important role: first, in ensuring that referees seriously consider whether submitted studies were indeed carried out with the smallest achievable negative impact on the animals and, secondly, in encouraging scientists to share refinements through the inclusion of a 3Rs section in papers publishing the results of animal-based research.