Top

Hernia

Published in:

01-04-2022 | Review

Inadequate awareness of adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, regarding reporting quality of hernia models repaired with meshes: a systematic review

Authors: H. Liu, M. J. C. A. M. Gielen, J. W. A. M. Bosmans, B. Winkens, N. D. Bouvy

Published in: Hernia | Issue 2/2022

Abstract

Purpose

Research papers involving animal studies often display poor reporting standards, leading to lower study reproducibility. We aim to determine the difference in reporting animal studies regarding abdominal wall hernia repair with mesh placement, before and after the publication of ARRIVE-2010 (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines. Furthermore, we aim to present the most up-to-date reporting quality using the updated ARRIVE-2020 as criteria.

Methods

All animal studies concerning hernia repair with meshes were systematically searched. Articles published in the 5 years leading up to the ARRIVE-2010 (pre-ARRIVE) and articles within the last 5 years until the updated ARRIVE 2.0 (post-ARRIVE) were compared for overall species and specific species separately. Articles published last year were evaluated for presenting fully reported (sub)items.

Results

The number of fully reported (sub)items per article was on average significantly higher for pre-ARRIVE than post-ARRIVE for overall species (mean (SD) = 14.0 (2.8) vs. 12.6 (2.5), P < 0.001). The same applies to rabbit (mean (SD) = 14.8 (2.6) vs. 12.6 (2.6), P = 0.001) and pig studies (mean (SD) = 14.5 (2.7) vs. 11.6 (2.6), P = 0.004), with no significance in rat studies (mean (SD) = 13.6 (2.9) vs. 12.9 (2.3), P = 0.076). Significance was found in several (sub)items between pre-ARRIVE and post-ARRIVE (n = 7, 3, 8, and 3 for overall species, rat, rabbit, and pig studies, respectively).

Conclusion

General reporting quality of animal experiments has been improved markedly by ARRIVE guidelines. However, more improvements are required considering the arrival of ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines.

Available only for authorised users

Franco NH (2013) Animal experiments in biomedical research: a historical perspective. Animals (Basel) 3(1):238–273. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3010238CrossRef

Freires IA, Sardi JC, de Castro RD, Rosalen PL (2017) Alternative animal and non-animal models for drug discovery and development: bonus or burden? Pharm Res 34(4):681–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-016-2069-zCrossRefPubMed

Sabine Kischkel AB, Schmidt W, Eickner T, Grabow N, Matschegewski C (2019) Application of 3R principles in small animal GLP testing of biomaterials. Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering 5(1):335–337. https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2019-0084CrossRef

Jilka RL (2016) The Road to Reproducibility in Animal Research. J Bone Miner Res 31(7):1317–1319. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.2881CrossRefPubMed

Macleod M, Mohan S (2019) Reproducibility and Rigor in Animal-Based Research. ILAR J 60(1):17–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilz015CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS (2015) The economics of reproducibility in preclinical research. PLoS Biol 13(6):e1002165. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Landis SC, Amara SG, Asadullah K, Austin CP, Blumenstein R, Bradley EW, Crystal RG, Darnell RB, Ferrante RJ, Fillit H, Finkelstein R, Fisher M, Gendelman HE, Golub RM, Goudreau JL, Gross RA, Gubitz AK, Hesterlee SE, Howells DW, Huguenard J, Kelner K, Koroshetz W, Krainc D, Lazic SE, Levine MS, Macleod MR, McCall JM, Moxley RT 3rd, Narasimhan K, Noble LJ, Perrin S, Porter JD, Steward O, Unger E, Utz U, Silberberg SD (2012) A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature 490(7419):187–191. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11556CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, Porritt MJ, Rewell S, O’Collins V, Macleod MR (2010) Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med 7(3):e1000245. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000245CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Perel P, Roberts I, Sena E, Wheble P, Briscoe C, Sandercock P, Macleod M, Mignini LE, Jayaram P, Khan KS (2007) Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: systematic review. BMJ 334(7586):197. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39048.407928.BECrossRefPubMed

10.

Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 8(6):e1000412. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Wurbel H (2020a) The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 18(7):e3000410. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Russell W, Burch R (1992) (originally printed in 1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, London

13.

Russell W, Burch R (1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, London

14.

Balls M (2015) The European Citizens' Stop Vivisection Initiative. Altern Lab Anim 43:147–150

15.

Vogels RRM, Kaufmann R, van den Hil LCL, van Steensel S, Schreinemacher MHF, Lange JF, Bouvy ND (2017) Critical overview of all available animal models for abdominal wall hernia research. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 21(5):667–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1605-zCrossRef

16.

Baylon K, Rodriguez-Camarillo P, Elias-Zuniga A, Diaz-Elizondo JA, Gilkerson R, Lozano K (2017) Past present and future of surgical meshes: a review. Membranes (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes7030047CrossRef

17.

Bringman S, Conze J, Cuccurullo D, Deprest J, Junge K, Klosterhalfen B, Parra-Davila E, Ramshaw B, Schumpelick V (2010) Hernia repair: the search for ideal meshes. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 14(1):81–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0587-xCrossRef

18.

Fairfield CJ, Harrison EM, Wigmore SJ (2017) Duplicate publication bias weakens the validity of meta-analysis of immunosuppression after transplantation. World J Gastroenterol 23(39):7198–7200. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7198CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Edinger T, Cohen AM (2013) A large-scale analysis of the reasons given for excluding articles that are retrieved by literature search during systematic review. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2013:379–387PubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) The ARRIVE guidelines—examples. animal research: reporting in vivo experiments. National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research, London

21.

Bara M, Joffe AR (2014) The methodological quality of animal research in critical care: the public face of science. Ann Intensive Care 4:26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-014-0026-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Howard BR (2002) Control of variability. ILAR J 43(4):194–201. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.4.194CrossRefPubMed

23.

Gaines Das RE (2002) Role of ancillary variables in the design, analysis, and interpretation of animal experiments. ILAR J 43(4):214–222. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.4.214CrossRefPubMed

24.

Liebsch M, Grune B, Seiler A, Butzke D, Oelgeschlager M, Pirow R, Adler S, Riebeling C, Luch A (2011) Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives. Arch Toxicol 85(8):841–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-011-0718-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Kilkenny C, Browne W, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG National Centre for the Replacement R, Reduction of Amimals in R (2011) Animal research reporting in vivo experiments the ARRIVE guidelines. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 31(4): 991–993. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.2010.220

26.

Suppe F (1998) The Structure of a Scientific Paper. Philos Sci 65(3):381–405CrossRef

27.

Leung V, Rousseau-Blass F, Beauchamp G, Pang DSJ (2018) ARRIVE has not ARRIVEd: Support for the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of in vivo Experiments) guidelines does not improve the reporting quality of papers in animal welfare, analgesia or anesthesia. PLoS ONE 13(5):e0197882. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197882CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

du Sert NP, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Wurbel H (2020) The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. J Cerebr Blood F Met. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678x20943823CrossRef

29.

Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Wurbel H (2020b) The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research. J Physiol. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP280389CrossRefPubMed

30.

Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, Clark A, Cuthill IC, Dirnagl U, Emerson M, Garner P, Holgate ST, Howells DW, Karp NA, Lazic SE, Lidster K, MacCallum CJ, Macleod M, Pearl EJ, Petersen OH, Rawle F, Reynolds P, Rooney K, Sena ES, Silberberg SD, Steckler T, Wurbel H (2020) The ARRIVE guidelines 20 Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. Exp Physiol. doi: https://doi.org/10.1113/EP088870

31.

Baker D, Lidster K, Sottomayor A, Amor S (2014) Two years later: journals are not yet enforcing the ARRIVE guidelines on reporting standards for pre-clinical animal studies. PLoS Biol 12(1):e1001756. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001756CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Avey MT, Moher D, Sullivan KJ, Fergusson D, Griffin G, Grimshaw JM, Hutton B, Lalu MM, Macleod M, Marshall J, Mei SH, Rudnicki M, Stewart DJ, Turgeon AF, McIntyre L, Canadian Critical Care Translational Biology G (2016) The devil is in the details: incomplete reporting in preclinical animal research. PLoS ONE 11(11):e0166733. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166733CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Inadequate awareness of adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, regarding reporting quality of hernia models repaired with meshes: a systematic review
Authors: H. Liu
M. J. C. A. M. Gielen
J. W. A. M. Bosmans
B. Winkens
N. D. Bouvy
Publication date: 01-04-2022
Publisher: Springer Paris
Published in: Hernia / Issue 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02351-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Inadequate awareness of adherence to ARRIVE guidelines, regarding reporting quality of hernia models repaired with meshes: a systematic review

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2022

Is absorbable mesh useful in preventing parastomal hernia after emergency surgery? The PARTHENOPE study

An evidence map and synthesis review with meta-analysis on the risk of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery with standard closure

Prophylactic retromuscular mesh placement for parastomal hernia prevention: a retrospective cohort study of permanent colostomies and ileostomies

The prevalence and consequences of abdominal rectus muscle diastasis among Finnish women: an epidemiological cohort study

Comment to: Prophylactic retromuscular mesh placement for parastomal hernia prevention. Author’s reply

When to use a prophylactic mesh after stoma closure: author's reply