ArticlePloS one2025
Tailoring anaesthetic strategies for diabetes research: Acepromazine vs. medetomidine in Aachen minipigs.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pre-established anaesthetic protocols in animal models might unexpectedly interfere with the main outcome of scientific projects and therefore they need to account for the specific research goals. We aimed to optimize the anaesthetic protocol and animal handling strategies in a diabetes-related-study exemplifying how the anaesthetic approach must be adjusted for individual research targets. Aachen minipigs were used as a model to test long-lasting skin glucose sensors for diabetic human patients. A total of 6 animals participated in two or three rounds of experiments. Each round lasted 2 months, with a maximum of 2 rounds per year. In each round, animals were anaesthetised 4 times: for glucose sensors insertion, twice for glucagon stress tests (GST), and a last time for removal of sensors. Acepromazine (ACE) was compared to medetomidine (MED) in association with butorphanol (BUT) and Ketamine (KET) and 4 parameters were analysed to define the optimum anaesthetic protocol including: sedation level, anaesthesia duration, effects on blood glucose and safety. ACE-BUT demonstrated a weaker sedative effect but reduced overall experimental time, minimized anaesthetic risk and minimally interfered with the glucose metabolism. The improvement obtained by animal conditioning and handling strategies applied in this study were not objectively estimated, although the aversion behavior was completely abolished. Based on the analysed parameters, the use of acepromazine is proposed to be superior when Aachen Minipigs are used specifically as a model for diabetes-related studies, albeit the recommendations for the anaesthesia of minipigs suggest otherwise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.