LaFollette Megan R, Clement Caroline S, Luchins Kerith R, Manuel Christopher A, Foley Patricia L, Hanson Wai H, Pettan-Brewer Christina, Winn Caroline B, Garner Joseph P
The 3Rs Collaborative, Denver, Colorado, United States of America.
Department of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2024 Dec 5;19(12):e0311840. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311840. eCollection 2024.
Despite increasing evidence that Environmental Health Monitoring (EHM) is an effective method to perform rodent colony health surveillance, promotes the 3Rs as a Replacement, is comparable or reduces cost, and demonstrates labor benefits, many research institutions continue to use live Soiled Bedding Sentinels (SBS). Some veterinarians and others responsible for rodent colony health monitoring remain cautious of the evidence supporting this new technology. Therefore, our objective was to perform a formal systematic review to identify, summarize, and evaluate the research on the efficacy of EHM as compared to SBS. This information is essential to establishing recommendations for rodent health monitoring programs.
We systematically searched and evaluated all articles comparing EHM to SBS identified from PubMed, Web of Science, and CAB abstracts initially on November 12, 2021 with an update on Oct 15, 2023. Our inclusion criteria included publication in a peer-reviewed journal and collection of empirical data on rodent health monitoring alternatives to soiled bedding sentinels. Outcome data was extracted and analyzed via logistic regression and secondary descriptive statistics. Due to the nature of the included studies, no risk of bias assessment was performed. No specific funding was received for this review.
Forty-two peer-reviewed articles passed inclusion criteria for analysis. The design of studies varied substantially but included publications investigating exhaust dust testing (n = 27), sentinel-free soiled bedding (n = 8), and direct colony sampling (n = 24). Based on both logistical regression and descriptive criteria, all types of EHM appear to be superior to soiled bedding sentinels at detecting pathogens, regardless of their taxonomic classification.
Based on these findings, we conclude there is a strong evidence base supporting the replacement of SBS with EHM. Looking forward, we encourage continued research on the detection of existing and emerging pathogens with these technologies and development of best practices for routine rodent health monitoring programs.
尽管越来越多的证据表明,环境卫生监测(EHM)是进行啮齿动物群落健康监测的有效方法,它促进了3Rs原则中的替代原则,成本相当或更低,且显示出人力优势,但许多研究机构仍在使用活的脏垫料哨兵动物(SBS)。一些兽医和其他负责啮齿动物群落健康监测的人员,对支持这项新技术的证据仍持谨慎态度。因此,我们的目标是进行一项正式的系统评价,以识别、总结和评估与SBS相比,EHM有效性的研究。这些信息对于制定啮齿动物健康监测计划的建议至关重要。
我们系统地检索并评估了所有将EHM与SBS进行比较的文章,最初于2021年11月12日从PubMed、科学网和CAB文摘中检索,2023年10月15日进行了更新。我们的纳入标准包括在同行评审期刊上发表,以及收集关于啮齿动物健康监测替代脏垫料哨兵动物的实证数据。通过逻辑回归和二级描述性统计提取并分析结果数据。由于纳入研究的性质,未进行偏倚风险评估。本评价未获得特定资金。
42篇经过同行评审的文章通过了纳入标准以供分析。研究设计差异很大,但包括调查排气粉尘检测(n = 27)、无哨兵脏垫料(n = 8)和直接群落采样(n = 24)的出版物。基于逻辑回归和描述性标准,所有类型的EHM在检测病原体方面似乎都优于脏垫料哨兵动物,无论病原体的分类如何。
基于这些发现,我们得出结论,有强有力的证据支持用EHM取代SBS。展望未来,我们鼓励继续研究如何利用这些技术检测现有和新出现的病原体,以及为常规啮齿动物健康监测计划制定最佳实践。