Difference in coagulation systems of large animal species used in cardiovascular research: a systematic review.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Louis Staelens, Tom Langenaeken, Filip Rega, Bart Meuris
{"title":"Difference in coagulation systems of large animal species used in cardiovascular research: a systematic review.","authors":"Louis Staelens, Tom Langenaeken, Filip Rega, Bart Meuris","doi":"10.1007/s10047-024-01446-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preclinical testing using animal models is indispensable in cardiovascular research. However, the translation to clinical practice of these animal models is questionable since it is not always clear how representative they are. This systematic review intends to summarize the interspecies differences in the coagulation profile of animal models used in cardiovascular research. It aims to guide future research in choosing the optimal animal species. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (Core Collection) and Cochrane Library was performed using a search string that was well defined and not modified during the study. An overview of the search terms used in each database can be found in the appendix. Articles describing coagulation systems in large animals were included. We identified 30 eligible studies of which 15 were included. Compared to humans, sheep demonstrated a less active external pathway of coagulation. Sheep had a higher platelet count but the platelet activatability and response to biomaterials were lower. Both sheep and pigs displayed no big differences in the internal coagulation system compared to humans. Pigs showed results very similar to those of humans, with the exception of a higher platelet count and stronger platelet aggregation in pigs. Coagulation profiles of different species used for preclinical testing show strong variation. Adequate knowledge of these differences is key in the selection of the appropriate species for preclinical cardiovascular research. Future thrombogenicity research should compare sheep to pig in an identical experimental setup.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-024-01446-y","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preclinical testing using animal models is indispensable in cardiovascular research. However, the translation to clinical practice of these animal models is questionable since it is not always clear how representative they are. This systematic review intends to summarize the interspecies differences in the coagulation profile of animal models used in cardiovascular research. It aims to guide future research in choosing the optimal animal species. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (Core Collection) and Cochrane Library was performed using a search string that was well defined and not modified during the study. An overview of the search terms used in each database can be found in the appendix. Articles describing coagulation systems in large animals were included. We identified 30 eligible studies of which 15 were included. Compared to humans, sheep demonstrated a less active external pathway of coagulation. Sheep had a higher platelet count but the platelet activatability and response to biomaterials were lower. Both sheep and pigs displayed no big differences in the internal coagulation system compared to humans. Pigs showed results very similar to those of humans, with the exception of a higher platelet count and stronger platelet aggregation in pigs. Coagulation profiles of different species used for preclinical testing show strong variation. Adequate knowledge of these differences is key in the selection of the appropriate species for preclinical cardiovascular research. Future thrombogenicity research should compare sheep to pig in an identical experimental setup.

Abstract Image

心血管研究中使用的大型动物物种凝血系统的差异:系统综述。
在心血管研究中,使用动物模型进行临床前试验是不可或缺的。然而,这些动物模型能否应用于临床实践还存在疑问,因为它们的代表性并不总是很明确。本系统综述旨在总结心血管研究中使用的动物模型在凝血特征方面的种间差异。其目的是指导未来的研究选择最佳的动物物种。研究人员使用定义明确且在研究过程中未作修改的检索字符串对 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science(核心库)和 Cochrane 图书馆进行了文献检索。各数据库使用的检索词概览见附录。我们纳入了描述大型动物凝血系统的文章。我们确定了 30 项符合条件的研究,其中 15 项被纳入。与人类相比,绵羊的外部凝血途径不那么活跃。绵羊的血小板数量较高,但血小板的活化能力和对生物材料的反应较低。与人类相比,绵羊和猪的内部凝血系统没有太大差异。猪的结果与人非常相似,但猪的血小板计数更高,血小板聚集性更强。用于临床前试验的不同物种的凝血谱显示出很大的差异。充分了解这些差异是为临床前心血管研究选择合适物种的关键。未来的血栓形成研究应在相同的实验装置中对绵羊和猪进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信