| Literature DB >> 31533626 |
Irina Staib-Lasarzik1, Nadine Nagel1, Anne Sebastiani1, Eva-Verena Griemert1, Serge C Thal2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In animal research, authorities require a classification of anticipated pain levels and a perioperative analgesia protocol prior to approval of the experiments. However, data on this topic is rare and so is the reported use of analgesics. We determined surrogate parameters of pain and general well-being after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), as well as the potential for improvement by different systemic analgesia paradigms. Brain injury was induced by filament perforation to mimic SAH. Sham-operated mice were included as surgical control groups with either neck or no-neck preparation. Mice with controlled cortical impact (CCI) injury were included as a control group with traumatic brain injury (TBI), but without neck preparation. Mice were randomized to buprenorphine, carprofen, meloxicam, or vehicle treatment. 24 h after SAH, CCI or sham surgery, pain and stress levels were assessed with a visual assessment score and the amount of food intake was recorded.Entities:
Keywords: Analgesia; Buprenorphine; Carprofen; Pain; Perioperative analgesia; Subarachnoid hemorrhage; Traumatic brain injury
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31533626 PMCID: PMC6751841 DOI: 10.1186/s12868-019-0531-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurosci ISSN: 1471-2202 Impact factor: 3.288
Criteria for the visual assessment score, points are awarded for abnormal animal behavior (best 0 points, worst 29 points)
| Item | Points | Best | Worst |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nest building | (0) Normal | 0 | 2 |
| (1) Use of paper towel | |||
| (2) No use of paper towel | |||
| Teeth grinding | (2) If present | 0 | 2 |
| Vocalization | (2) If present | 0 | 2 |
| Hair coat | (0) Normal | 0 | 6 |
| (2) Not well groomed | |||
| (4) Rough, dirty | |||
| (6) Very rough, dirty | |||
| Eyes | (0) Open, alert | 0 | 4 |
| (2) Squinted | |||
| (4) Closed | |||
| Coordination and posture | (0) Normal | 0 | 6 |
| (1) Lightly hunched | |||
| (2) Walks hunched | |||
| (3) Walks hunched and slowly | |||
| (4) No running | |||
| (5) Hunched, strumbles | |||
| (6) Hunched, no movement | |||
| Overall condition | (0) Normal | 0 | 3 |
| (1) Rough, acts normal | |||
| (2) Rough, depressed | |||
| (3) Very rough, very depressed | |||
| Withering | (0) Skin fold < 1 s | 0 | 4 |
| (2) Skin fold > 1 s | |||
| (4) Skin fold > 2 s | |||
| Total | 0 | 29 |
Fig. 1Visual assessment score (best 0 points, worst 29 points) as an indicator of pain intensity after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH, a) and controlled cortical impact (CCI, b). SAH subarachnoid hemorrhage, CCI controlled cortical impact, SHAM sham operation, VEH vehicle solution, BUP buprenorphine, CAR carprofen, MEL meloxicam (Kruskal–Wallis test and Dunn’s multiple comparison test; SAH: N = 25, H = 18.67, P = 0.0009; CCI: N = 50, H = 18.69, P = 0.0009)
Fig. 2Food intake after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH, a) and controlled cortical impact (CCI, b). SAH subarachnoid hemorrhage, CCI controlled cortical impact, SHAM sham operation, VEH vehicle solution, BUP buprenorphine, CAR carprofen, MEL meloxicam, g gramm, dpi day post injury (one-way ANOVA and Holm–Šidák’s multiple comparison test; a before SAH: F = 0.8336, P = 0.5205; after SAH: F = 11.27, P < 0.0001; b before CCI: F = 0.7304, P = 0.5759; after CCI: F = 7.221, P = 0.0002; data are presented as mean ± SD)