An official website of the United States government
Scientists who perform major survival surgery on laboratory animals face a dual welfare and methodological challenge: how to choose surgical anesthetics and post-operative analgesics that will best control animal suffering, knowing that both pain and the drugs that manage pain can all affect research outcomes. Scientists who publish full descriptions of animal procedures allow critical and systematic reviews of data, demonstrate their adherence to animal welfare norms, and guide other scientists on how to conduct their own studies in the field. We investigated what information on animal pain management a reasonably diligent scientist might find in planning for a successful experiment. To explore how scientists in a range of fields describe their management of this ethical and methodological concern, we scored 400 scientific articles that included major animal survival surgeries as part of their experimental methods, for the completeness of information on anesthesia and analgesia. The 400 articles (250 accepted for publication pre-2011, and 150 in 2014–15, along with 174 articles they reference) included thoracotomies, craniotomies, gonadectomies, organ transplants, peripheral nerve injuries, spinal laminectomies and orthopedic procedures in dogs, primates, swine, mice, rats and other rodents. We scored articles for Publication Completeness (PC), which was any mention of use of anesthetics or analgesics; Analgesia Use (AU) which was any use of post-surgical analgesics, and Analgesia Completeness (a composite score comprising intra-operative analgesia, extended post-surgical analgesia, and use of multimodal analgesia). 338 of 400 articles were PC. 98 of these 338 were AU, with some mention of analgesia, while 240 of 338 mentioned anesthesia only but not postsurgical analgesia. Journals’ caliber, as measured by their 2013 Impact Factor, had no effect on PC or AU. We found no effect of whether a journal instructs authors to consult the ARRIVE publishing guidelines published in 2010 on PC or AC for the 150 mouse and rat articles in our 2014–15 dataset. None of the 302 articles that were silent about analgesic use included an explicit statement that analgesics were withheld, or a discussion of how pain management or untreated pain might affect results. We conclude that current scientific literature cannot be trusted to present full detail on use of animal anesthetics and analgesics. We report that publication guidelines focus more on other potential sources of bias in experimental results, under-appreciate the potential for pain and pain drugs to skew data, PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0155001 May 12, 2016 1 / 24 a11111 OPEN ACCESS Citation: Carbone L, Austin J (2016) Pain and Laboratory Animals: Publication Practices for Better Data Reproducibility and Better Animal Welfare. PLoS ONE 11(5): e0155001. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0155001 Editor: Chang-Qing Gao, Central South University, CHINA Received: December 29, 2015 Accepted: April 22, 2016 Published: May 12, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Carbone, Austin. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. Authors may be contacted for further information. Funding: This study was funded by the United States National Science Foundation Division of Social and Economic Sciences. Award #1455838. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. and thus mostly treat pain management as solely an animal welfare concern, in the jurisdiction of animal care and use committees. At the same time, animal welfare regulations do not include guidance on publishing animal data, even though publication is an integral part of the cycle of research and can affect the welfare of animals in studies building on published work, leaving it to journals and authors to voluntarily decide what details of animal use to publish. We suggest that journals, scientists and animal welfare regulators should revise current guidelines and regulations, on treatment of pain and on transparent reporting of treatment of pain, to improve this dual welfare and data-quality deficiency.
more »
« less
Evaluation of Candidates for Systemic Analgesia and General Anesthesia in the Emerging Model Cephalopod, Euprymna berryi
Cephalopods’ remarkable behavior and complex neurobiology make them valuable comparative model organisms, but studies aimed at enhancing welfare of captive cephalopods remain uncommon. Increasing regulation of cephalopods in research laboratories has resulted in growing interest in welfare-oriented refinements, including analgesia and anesthesia. Although general and local anesthesia in cephalopods have received limited prior study, there have been no studies of systemic analgesics in cephalopods to date. Here we show that analgesics from several different drug classes may be effective in E. berryi. Buprenorphine, ketorolac and dexmedetomidine, at doses similar to those used in fish, showed promising effects on baseline nociceptive thresholds, excitability of peripheral sensory nerves, and on behavioral responses to transient noxious stimulation. We found no evidence of positive effects of acetaminophen or ketamine administered at doses that are effective in vertebrates. Bioinformatic analyses suggested conserved candidate receptors for dexmedetomidine and ketorolac, but not buprenorphine. We also show that rapid general immersion anesthesia using a mix of MgCl2 and ethanol was successful in E. berryi at multiple age classes, similar to findings in other cephalopods. These data indicate that systemic analgesia and general anesthesia in Euprymna berryi are achievable welfare enhancing interventions, but further study and refinement is warranted.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10405325
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Biology
- Volume:
- 12
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 2079-7737
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 201
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Unique characteristics of the naked mole-rat (NMR) have made it increasingly popular as a laboratory animal model. These rodents are used to study many fields of research including longevity and aging, cancer, circadian rhythm, pain, and metabolism. Currently, the analgesic dosing regimens used in the NMR mirror those used in other rodent species. However, there is no pharmacokinetic (PK) data supporting the use of injectable analgesics in the NMR. Therefore, we conducted two independent PK studies to evaluate two commonly used analgesics in the NMR; meloxicam (2 mg/kg SC) and buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg SC). In each study, blood was collected at 8 time points after subcutaneous injection of meloxicam or buprenorphine (0 (pre-dose), 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hrs). Three NMRs were used per time point for a total of 24 animals per PK study. Plasma concentrations of meloxicam were highest between 0.5 hrs and 1 hr post-injection. Levels remained above the extrapolated dog and cat therapeutic threshold levels (390-911 ng/mL) for at least 24 hrs. Plasma concentrations of buprenorphine were highest between 0.25 and 0.5 hrs post-injection. Levels remained above the human therapeutic threshold (1 ng/mL) for up to 21 hrs. No skin reactions were seen in association with injection of either drug. In summary, this data supports dosing meloxicam (2 mg/kg SC) once every 24 hrs and buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg SC) once every 8-12 hrs in the NMR. Further studies should be performed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of these drugs by correlating plasma concentrations with post-operative pain assessments.more » « less
-
Suckow, Mark (Ed.)Abstract Unique characteristics of the naked mole-rat (NMR) have made it increasingly popular as a laboratory animal model. These rodents are used to study many fields of research including longevity and aging, cancer, circadian rhythm, pain, and metabolism. Currently, the analgesic dosing regimens used in the NMR mirror those used in other rodent species. However, there is no pharmacokinetic (PK) data supporting the use of injectable analgesics in the NMR. Therefore, we conducted 2 independent PK studies to evaluate 2 commonly used analgesics in the NMR: meloxicam (2 mg/kg SC) and buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg SC). In each study, blood was collected at 8 time points after subcutaneous injection of meloxicam or buprenorphine (0 [predose], 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 h). Three NMRs were used per time point for a total of 24 animals per PK study. Plasma concentrations of meloxicam were highest between 0.5 and 1 h postinjection. Levels remained above the extrapolated dog and cat therapeutic threshold levels (390 to 911 ng/mL) for at least 24 h. Plasma concentrations of buprenorphine were highest between 0.25 and 0.5 h postinjection. Levels remained above the human therapeutic threshold (1 ng/mL) for up to 21 h. No skin reactions were seen in association with injection of either drug. In summary, these data support dosing meloxicam (2 mg/kg SC) once every 24 h and buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg SC) once every 8 to 12 h in the NMR. Further studies should be performed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of these drugs by correlating plasma concentrations with postoperative pain assessments.more » « less
-
Anolis lizards have served as important research models in fields ranging from evolution and ecology to physiology and biomechanics. However, anoles are also emerging as important models for studies of embryo development and tissue regeneration. The increased use of anoles in the laboratory has produced a need to establish effective methods of anesthesia, both for routine veterinary procedures and for research procedures. Therefore, we tested the efficacy of different anesthetic treatments in adult female Anolis sagrei. Alfaxalone, dexmedetomidine, hydromorphone, ketamine and tribromoethanol were administered subcutaneously (SC), either alone or combined at varying doses in a total of 64 female anoles. Drug induction time, duration, anesthesia level and adverse effects were assessed. Differences in anesthesia level were observed depending on injection site and drug combination. Alfaxalone/dexmedetomidine and tribromoethanol/dexmedetomidine were the most effective drug combinations for inducing a surgical plane of anesthesia in anoles. Brown anoles injected SC with alfaxalone (30 mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine (0.1 mg/kg) or with tribromoethanol (400 mg/kg) plus dexmedetomidine (0.1 mg/kg) experienced mean durations of surgical anesthesia levels of 31.2 ± 5.3 and 87.5 ± 19.8 min with full recovery after another 10.9 ± 2.9 and 46.2 ± 41.8 min, respectively. Hydromorphone given with alfaxalone/dexmedetomidine resulted in deep anesthesia with respiratory depression, while ketamine/hydromorphone/dexmedetomidine produced only light to moderate sedation. We determined that alfaxalone/dexmedetomidine or tribromoethanol/dexmedetomidine combinations were sufficient to maintain a lizard under general anesthesia for coeliotomy. This study represents a significant step towards understanding the effects of anesthetic agents in anole lizards and will benefit both veterinary care and research on these animals.more » « less
-
Mohar, Bojan; Shinkar, Igor; O'Donnell, Ryan (Ed.)We study the bilateral trade problem where a seller owns a single indivisible item, and a potential buyer seeks to purchase it. Previous mechanisms for this problem only considered the case where the values of the buyer and the seller are drawn from independent distributions. In contrast, this paper studies bilateral trade mechanisms when the values are drawn from a joint distribution. We prove that the buyer-offering mechanism guarantees an approximation ratio of e/e−1 ≈ 1.582 to the social welfare even if the values are drawn from a joint distribution. The buyer-offering mechanism is Bayesian incentive compatible, but the seller has a dominant strategy. We prove the buyer-offering mechanism is optimal in the sense that no Bayesian mechanism where one of the players has a dominant strategy can obtain an approximation ratio better than e/e−1. We also show that no mechanism in which both sides have a dominant strategy can provide any constant approximation to the social welfare when the values are drawn from a joint distribution. Finally, we prove some impossibility results on the power of general Bayesian incentive compatible mechanisms. In particular, we show that no deterministic Bayesian incentive-compatible mechanism can provide an approximation ratio better than 1+ln2/2≈ 1.346.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12020201
