An Anglocentric History of Anaesthetics and Analgesics in the Refinement of Animal Experiments

Inhalational anaesthetic agent consumption within a multidisciplinary veterinary teaching hospital: an environmental audit

Inhalational anaesthetic agents are routinely used in veterinary anaesthesia practices, yet their consumption contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impact. We conducted a 55-day observational study at a veterinary teaching hospital in Switzerland, monitoring isoflurane and sevoflurane consumption across small, equine and farm animal clinics and analysed the resulting environmental impact. Results revealed that in total, 9.36 L of isoflurane and 1.27 L of sevoflurane were used to anaesthetise 409 animals across 1,489 h. Consumption rates varied among species, with small and farm animals ranging between 8.7 and 13 mL/h, while equine anaesthesia exhibited a higher rate, 41.2 mL/h. Corresponding to 7.36 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in total environmental emissions or between 2.4 and 31.3 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent per hour. Comparison to human anaesthesia settings showed comparable consumption rates to small animals, suggesting shared environmental implications, albeit on a smaller scale. This research highlights the importance of continued evaluation of veterinary anaesthesia practices to balance patient safety with environmental stewardship; potential mitigation strategies are explored and discussed.

The impact of stress and anesthesia on animal models of infectious disease

Stress and general anesthesia have an impact on the functional response of the organism due to the detrimental effects on cardiovascular, immunological, and metabolic function, which could limit the organism's response to an infectious event. Animal studies have formed an essential step in understanding and mitigating infectious diseases, as the complexities of physiology and immunity cannot yet be replicated in vivo. Using animals in research continues to come under increasing societal scrutiny, and it is therefore crucial that the welfare of animals used in disease research is optimized to meet both societal expectations and improve scientific outcomes. Everyday management and procedures in animal studies are known to cause stress, which can not only cause poorer welfare outcomes, but also introduces variables in disease studies. Whilst general anesthesia is necessary at times to reduce stress and enhance animal welfare in disease research, evidence of physiological and immunological disruption caused by general anesthesia is increasing. To better understand and quantify the effects of stress and anesthesia on disease study and welfare outcomes, utilizing the most appropriate animal monitoring strategies is imperative. This article aims to analyze recent scientific evidence about the impact of stress and anesthesia as uncontrolled variables, as well as reviewing monitoring strategies and technologies in animal models during infectious diseases.

Animal welfare requirements in publishing guidelines

Descriptions of measures taken to optimize animal welfare are often absent from scientific reports of animal experiments. One reason may be that journal guidelines inadequately compel authors to provide such information. In this study, online English language versions of the 'Guidelines to authors' (GTAs) from 54 national biomedical journals were examined for neutral (unrelated to welfare) and non-neutral keywords referring to: animal welfare; the '3Rs'; the ARRIVE (2010) guidelines, and regulations pertaining to animal experimentation. Journals were selected from nine countries (UK, US, China, Canada, India, Brazil, Germany, Japan and Australia) and seven biomedical specialties (oncology, rheumatology, surgery, pharmacology, medicine, anaesthesia and veterinary medicine). Total GTA word counts varied from 1137 to 31,609. The keyword count identified per category were expressed per myriad (10,000) of total word count. One-way analyses of variance followed by post hoc Tukey pairwise comparisons revealed greater non-neutral per myriad word counts for (a) veterinary GTAs compared with medicine, oncology, rheumatology or surgery; (b) British, compared with Australian, Canadian, German and Japanese GTAs; and (c) no differences between non-neutral categories. The English language versions of GTAs of British and veterinary medical journals contain more words associated with animal welfare, the 3Rs and the ARRIVE guidelines than those from eight other countries and six other medical specialities. The exclusion of 'national' language versions from analysis precludes attempts to identify national differences in attitudes to laboratory animal welfare.