Abbas Tariq O, Elawad Abubakr, Kareem Aamir, Pullattayil S Abdul Kareem, Ali Mansour, Alnaimi Abdulla
Regenerative Medicine Research Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Pediatric Urology Section, Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar.
Front Pediatr. 2021 Aug 9;9:718647. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.718647. eCollection 2021.
There is a steadily growing number of different reconstructive surgical procedures for hypospadias that were tested on animal models prior to their human application. However, the clinical translatability and reproducibility of the results encountered in preclinical urethral reconstruction experiments is considered poor, with significant factors contributing to the poor design and reporting of animal experiments. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of the design and reporting in published articles of urethral reconstructive preclinical studies. Both PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for animal urethral repair experiments between January 2014 and September 2019. Internal quality (bias) was evaluated through several signaling questions arising from the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE), while the quality of reporting was assessed by the Animal Research: Reporting of Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines by scoring of a 20-item checklist. A total of 638 articles were initially screened after the literature search. Employing the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 30 studies were chosen for full-text screening and 21 studies were considered eligible for the quality assessment. The mean score of the checklist was 66%. The elements that accomplished the highest grades included the number of animals utilized, the number in each investigational and control group, and the delineation of investigational conclusions. The items that were least commonly stated comprised information about the experimental method, housing and husbandry, rationalization of the number of animals, and reporting of adverse events. No paper stated the sample size estimation. We found that several critical experiment design principles were poorly reported, which hinders a rigorous appraisal of the scientific quality and reproducibility of the experiments. A comprehensive implementation of the ARRIVE guidelines in animal studies exploring urethral repair is necessary to facilitate the effective translation of preclinical research findings into clinical therapies.
在用于治疗尿道下裂的各种重建性外科手术应用于人体之前,都先在动物模型上进行了测试,且此类手术的数量在稳步增加。然而,临床前尿道重建实验结果的临床可转化性和可重复性被认为较差,动物实验设计和报告存在重大缺陷是导致这种情况的重要因素。我们的目的是评估已发表的尿道重建临床前研究文章的设计和报告质量。在PubMed和EMBASE数据库中搜索了2014年1月至2019年9月期间的动物尿道修复实验。通过实验室动物实验系统评价中心(SYRCLE)提出的几个信号问题评估内部质量(偏倚),同时根据《动物研究:实验报告规范》(ARRIVE)指南对一份20项清单进行评分来评估报告质量。文献检索后,最初筛选出638篇文章。根据纳入和排除标准,选择30项研究进行全文筛选,21项研究被认为符合质量评估要求。清单的平均得分是66%。得分最高的要素包括使用的动物数量、每个实验组和对照组的数量以及研究结论的描述。最不常提及的项目包括关于实验方法、饲养和管理、动物数量合理性以及不良事件报告的信息。没有一篇论文说明样本量估计。我们发现,几个关键的实验设计原则报告不足,这妨碍了对实验科学质量和可重复性的严格评估。在探索尿道修复的动物研究中全面实施ARRIVE指南,对于促进临床前研究结果有效转化为临床治疗是必要的。