Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of bone marrow-derived cell therapies on hind limb perfusion.

Preclinical and clinical studies on the administration of bone marrow-derived cells to restore perfusion show conflicting results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on preclinical studies to assess the efficacy of bone marrow-derived cells in the hind limb ischemia model and identify possible determinants of therapeutic efficacy. In vivo animal studies were identified using a systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE on 10 January 2022. 85 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. Study characteristics and outcome data on relative perfusion were extracted. The pooled mean difference was estimated using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed for all included studies. We found a significant increase in perfusion in the affected limb after administration of bone marrow-derived cells compared to that in the control groups. However, there was a high heterogeneity between studies, which could not be explained. There was a high degree of incomplete reporting across studies. We therefore conclude that the current quality of preclinical research is insufficient (low certainty level as per GRADE assessment) to identify specific factors that might improve human clinical trials.

Protocol for a systematic review of good surgical practice guidelines for experimental rodent surgery.

Objective: Surgery is an integral part of many experimental studies. Aseptic and minimal invasive surgical technique and optimal perioperative and post-operative care are prerequisites to achieve surgical success and best possible animal welfare outcomes. Good surgical practice cannot only improve the animal's postoperative recovery, but also study outcome and validity. There seems to be a lack of implementation of good surgical practice during rodent surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, critically evaluate and compare the currently recommended standards and underlying guidelines for rodent surgery-and finally to compile a comprehensive guideline of good surgical practice for rodent surgery. Search strategy: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched to identify guidelines published in peer-reviewed journals. To identify grey literature and unpublished guidelines, we will perform a Google search for published guidelines and search laboratory animal sciences books for relevant book chapters. Additionally, we will conduct a survey among animal researchers enquiring about the guidelines they use. Screening and study selection: For publications retrieved by the systematic search, unique references are screened by two reviewers, first for eligibility based on title and abstract and subsequently for final inclusion based on full text. Eligibility of books is based on title and content, final inclusion based on chapter full text. Guidelines are either retrieved by Google searches or a survey. Google searches will be conducted by at least four of the authors. Thereafter, guidelines will be screened by two of the authors. Data extraction and synthesis: We will extract data from publications, book chapters and guidelines. Based on the extracted data, we will perform a descriptive synthesis of the bibliographical details, guideline development and endorsement, and the prevalence of individual recommendations, including subgroup analysis of the guidance per continent or country and differences between peer-reviewed versus non-peer-reviewed guidance.

Preregistration of animal research protocols: development and 3-year overview of preclinicaltrials.eu.

Open, prospective registration of a study protocol can improve research rigour in a number of ways. Through preregistration, key features of the study's methodology are recorded and maintained as a permanent record, enabling comparison of the completed study with what was planned. By recording the study hypothesis and planned outcomes a priori, preregistration creates transparency and can reduce the risk of several common biases, such as hypothesising after results are known and outcome switching or selective outcome reporting. Second, preregistration raises awareness of measures to reduce bias, such as randomisation and blinding. Third, preregistration provides a comprehensive listing of planned studies, which can prevent unnecessary duplication and reduce publication bias. Although commonly acknowledged and applied in clinical research since 2000, preregistration of animal studies is not yet the norm. In 2018 we launched the first dedicated, open, online register for animal study protocols: wwwpreclinicaltrialseu. Here, we provide insight in the development of preclinicaltrials.eu (PCT) and evaluate its use during the first 3 years after its launch. Furthermore, we elaborate on ongoing developments such as the rise of comparable registries, increasing support for preregistration in the Netherlands-which led to the funding of PCT by the Dutch government-and pilots of mandatory preregistration by several funding bodies. We show the international coverage of currently registered protocols but with the overall low number of (pre)registered protocols.