IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0255175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the severity of laparotomy and partial hepatectomy in male rats—A multimodal approach

Author

Listed:
  • Leonie Zieglowski
  • Anna Maria Kümmecke
  • Lisa Ernst
  • Rupert Palme
  • Ralf Weiskirchen
  • Steven R Talbot
  • René H Tolba

Abstract

This study assessed the postoperative severity after three different visceral surgical interventions in rats by using objective parameters pertaining to various disciplines. The objective was to evaluate whether the degree of severity increases with the invasiveness of the intervention and whether this is in accordance with the EU Directive 2010/63. 136 adult male WistarHan rats were assigned to three groups: Sham-laparotomy (Sham) [7 days post-surgical survival time]; 50% partial hepatectomy (PH); 70% PH [PH groups with 1, 3, or 7 days post-surgical survival times]. Post-surgical severity assessment was performed via several multimodal assessment tools: I) model-specific score sheet focusing on body weight, general condition, spontaneous behavior, and the animals’ willingness to move as well as on wound healing; II) Open Field tests evaluating the total distance and velocity an animal moved within 10 minutes and its rearing behavior during the test; III) telemetric data analyzing heart rate and blood pressure; and IV) analysis of blood (AST, ALT, and hemogram) and fecal samples (fecal corticosterone metabolites). Significant differences among the experimental groups and models were observed. We demonstrated that the Open Field test can detect significant changes in severity levels. Sham-laparotomy and removal of 50% of the liver mass were associated with comparable severity (mild–moderate); the severity parameters returned to baseline levels within seven days. Removal of 70% of the liver tissue seemed to be associated with a moderate severity grade and entailed a longer recovery period (>7 days) for complete regeneration. We recommend the use of Open Field tests as part of multimodal objective severity assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonie Zieglowski & Anna Maria Kümmecke & Lisa Ernst & Rupert Palme & Ralf Weiskirchen & Steven R Talbot & René H Tolba, 2021. "Assessing the severity of laparotomy and partial hepatectomy in male rats—A multimodal approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-21, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0255175
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0255175
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0255175&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0255175?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0255175. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.