VetSRev
Database of veterinary systematic reviews
Database of veterinary systematic reviews
Animals (Basel) (2021) 11:
DOI: 10.3390/ani11051233
The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize all the preclinical studies carried out in periosteal distraction osteogenesis (PDO) in order to evaluate the quality using the ARRIVE guidelines. The animal models used, and the influence of the complications, were analysed in order to establish the most appropriate models for this technique. The PRISMA statements have been followed. Bibliographic sources have been consulted manually by two reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated using the SYRCLE tool for animal studies, and the quality of the studies with the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. The selection criteria established by expert researchers were applied to decide which studies should be included in the review, that resulted in twenty-four studies. Only one achieved the maximum score according to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines. The rabbit as an animal model has presented good results in PDO, both for calvaria and jaw. Rats have shown good results for PDO in calvaria. The minipig should not be recommended as an animal model in PDO. Despite the increase in the quality of the studies since the implementation of the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines, it would be necessary to improve the quality of the studies to facilitate the transparency, comparison, and reproducibility of future works.
García-González, M., Muñoz, F., González-Cantalapiedra, A., López-Peña, M., & Saulacic, N. (2021). Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis. Animals (Basel), 11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051233 Animals, animal models, systematic reviews, guidelines, complications, evaluation, bones, systematic review, bone regeneration, Osteogenesis, quality, selection criteria, selection, osteogenic distraction, periosteal distraction osteogenesis, Animal Shells, miniature pigs, osteogenesis imperfecta