Several studies suggested an informative value of behavioral and grimace scale parameters for the detection of pain. However, the robustness and reliability of the parameters as well as the current extent of implementation are still largely unknown. In this study, we aimed to systematically analyze the current evidence-base of grimace scale, burrowing, and nest building for the assessment of post-surgical pain in mice and rats. The following platforms were searched for relevant articles: PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and Web of Science. Only full peer-reviewed studies that describe the grimace scale, burrowing, and/or nest building as pain parameters in the post-surgical phase in mice and/or rats were included. Information about the study design, animal characteristics, intervention characteristics, and outcome measures was extracted from identified publications. In total, 74 papers were included in this review. The majority of studies have been conducted in young adult C57BL/6J mice and Sprague Dawley and Wistar rats. While there is an apparent lack of information about young animals, some studies that analyzed the grimace scale in aged rats were identified. The majority of studies focused on laparotomy-associated pain. Only limited information is available about other types of surgical interventions. While an impact of surgery and an influence of analgesia were rather consistently reported in studies focusing on grimace scales, the number of studies that assessed respective effects was rather low for nest building and burrowing. Moreover, controversial findings were evident for the impact of analgesics on post-surgical nest building activity. Regarding analgesia, a monotherapeutic approach was identified in the vast majority of studies with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) drugs and opioids being most commonly used. In conclusion, most evidence exists for grimace scales, which were more frequently used to assess post-surgical pain in rodents than the other behavioral parameters. However, our findings also point to relevant knowledge gaps concerning the post-surgical application in different strains, age levels, and following different surgical procedures. Future efforts are also necessary to directly compare the sensitivity and robustness of different readout parameters applied for the assessment of nest building and burrowing activities.

Electrophysiological recordings in animals constitute frequently applied techniques to study neuronal function. In this context, several authors described tethered recordings as a semi-restraint situation with negative implications for animal welfare and suggested radiotelemetric setups as a refinement measure. Thus, we here investigated the hypothesis that tethered recordings exert measurable effects on behavioral and sleep patterns in Sprague–Dawley rats. Animals were kept in monitoring glass cages either with or without a head connection to a recording cable. Saccharin preference, nest building, serum corticosterone and fecal corticosterone metabolite levels were in a comparable range in both groups. The proportion of vigilance states was not affected by the cable connection. Minor group differences were detected in bout lengths distributions, with a trend for longer NREM and WAKE stages in animals with a cable connection. However, a relevant effect was not further confirmed by an analysis of the number of sleep/wake and wake/sleep transitions. The analysis of activity levels did not reveal group differences. However, prolonged exposure to the tethered condition resulted in an intra-group increase of activity. In conclusion, the comparison between freely moving vs tethered rats did not reveal major group differences. Our findings indicate that telemetric recordings only offer small advantages vs cabled set ups, though this may differ in other experimental studies where for example anxiety- or drug-induced effects are analyzed.

The influence of protocol standardization between laboratories on their replicability of preclinical results has not been addressed in a systematic way. While standardization is considered good research practice as a means to control for undesired external noise (i.e., highly variable results), some reports suggest that standardized protocols may lead to idiosyncratic results, thus undermining replicability. Through the EQIPD consortium, a multi-lab collaboration between academic and industry partners, we aimed to elucidate parameters that impact the replicability of preclinical animal studies. To this end, 3 experimental protocols were implemented across 7 laboratories. The replicability of results was determined using the distance travelled in an open field after administration of pharmacological compounds known to modulate locomotor activity (MK-801, diazepam, and clozapine) in C57BL/6 mice as a worked example. The goal was to determine whether harmonization of study protocols across laboratories improves the replicability of the results and whether replicability can be further improved by systematic variation (heterogenization) of 2 environmental factors (time of testing and light intensity during testing) within laboratories. Protocols were tested in 3 consecutive stages and differed in the extent of harmonization across laboratories and standardization within laboratories: stage 1, minimally aligned across sites (local protocol); stage 2, fully aligned across sites (harmonized protocol) with and without systematic variation (standardized and heterogenized cohort); and stage 3, fully aligned across sites (standardized protocol) with a different compound. All protocols resulted in consistent treatment effects across laboratories, which were also replicated within laboratories across the different stages. Harmonization of protocols across laboratories reduced between-lab variability substantially compared to each lab using their local protocol. In contrast, the environmental factors chosen to introduce systematic variation within laboratories did not affect the behavioral outcome. Therefore, heterogenization did not reduce between-lab variability further compared to the harmonization of the standardized protocol. Altogether, these findings demonstrate that subtle variations between lab-specific study protocols may introduce variation across independent replicate studies even after protocol harmonization and that systematic heterogenization of environmental factors may not be sufficient to account for such between-lab variation. Differences in replicability of results within and between laboratories highlight the ubiquity of study-specific variation due to between-lab variability, the importance of transparent and fine-grained reporting of methodologies and research protocols, and the importance of independent study replication.

Experimental craniotomies are a common surgical procedure in neuroscience. Because inadequate analgesia appears to be a problem in animal-based research, we conducted this review and collected information on management of craniotomy-associated pain in laboratory mice and rats. A comprehensive search and screening resulted in the identification of 2235 studies, published in 2009 and 2019, describing craniotomy in mice and/or rats. While key features were extracted from all studies, detailed information was extracted from a random subset of 100 studies/year. Reporting of perioperative analgesia increased from 2009 to 2019. However, the majority of studies from both years did not report pharmacologic pain management. Moreover, reporting of multimodal treatments remained at a low level, and monotherapeutic approaches were more common. Among drug groups, reporting of pre- and postoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and local anesthetics in 2019 exceeded that of 2009. In summary, these results suggest that inadequate analgesia and oligoanalgesia are persistent issues associated with experimental intracranial surgery. This underscores the need for intensified training of those working with laboratory rodents subjected to craniotomies.Systematic review registrationhttps://osf.io/7d4qe.

No abstract