Abstract
Animal models are often used to test the effectiveness of a drug or procedure before proceeding to clinical trials. One reason for use of animal models is that they allow researchers to focus on particular pathological processes without the confounding effects of other injuries and treatments. However, it is essential that their results are valid and precise. Biased or imprecise results from animal experiments may result in clinical trials of biologically inert or even harmful substances, thus exposing patients to unnecessary risk and wasting scarce research resources. Moreover, if animal experiments fail to inform medical research then the animals suffer unnecessarily. The Italian pathologist Pietro Croce criticised vivisection on scientific grounds. He argued that results from animal experiments cannot be applied to humans because of the biological differences between animals and humans and because the results of animal experiments are too dependent on the type of animal model used.1 Croce's arguments were based on insights into zoology and pathophysiology. In this paper, we make some methodological observations on animal experiments. Our observations were made in the context of a systematic review of all available randomised controlled trials of fluid resuscitation in animal models of uncontrolled bleeding. We conducted this review because we wanted to assess the scientific basis for fluid resuscitation. A previous systematic review of randomised trials of fluid resuscitation in bleeding trauma patients had provided no evidence that fluid resuscitation improved outcome.2 #### Summary points New drugs and procedures are usually tested in animals before conducting clinical trials Validity of animal experiments is essential for human health care and fundamental to animal welfare A systematic review of animal experiments on fluid resuscitation found that most studies were underpowered and provided little information on possible bias Systematic reviews of animal experiments allow a more objective appraisal of the evidence and …
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Acute renal failure – definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group
Abstract Introduction There is no consensus definition of acute renal failure (ARF) in critically ill patients. More than 30 different definitions have been used in the literatu...
Developing a New Definition and Assessing New Clinical Criteria for Septic Shock
Based on a consensus process using results from a systematic review, surveys, and cohort studies, septic shock is defined as a subset of sepsis in which underlying circulatory, ...
Effects of tranexamic acid on death, vascular occlusive events, and blood transfusion in trauma patients with significant haemorrhage (CRASH-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial
The article is reprinted after 'Lancet 2010; 376: 23-32' by the above collaborators with written permission from Lancet Authority.Background: Tranexamic acid can reduce bleeding...
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies published from January 1, 1950, through November 31, 2008, using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, and all Evidence-...
Nimodipine in Animal Model Experiments of Focal Cerebral Ischemia
Background and Purpose — Based on the results of animal experiments, clinical trials were performed with nimodipine, which did not demonstrate a beneficial effect on outcome aft...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2002
- Type
- review
- Volume
- 324
- Issue
- 7335
- Pages
- 474-476
- Citations
- 128
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.324.7335.474