Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis

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 estab...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mario García-González, Fernando Muñoz, Antonio González-Cantalapiedra, Mónica López-Peña, Nikola Saulacic
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-04-01
Series:Animals
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/5/1233
id doaj-2443c19209b948acbaf812fc4de82e6b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2443c19209b948acbaf812fc4de82e6b2021-04-24T23:01:45ZengMDPI AGAnimals2076-26152021-04-01111233123310.3390/ani11051233Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction OsteogenesisMario García-González0Fernando Muñoz1Antonio González-Cantalapiedra2Mónica López-Peña3Nikola Saulacic4Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 27002 Lugo, SpainDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 27002 Lugo, SpainDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 27002 Lugo, SpainDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 27002 Lugo, SpainDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, SwitzerlandThe 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.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/5/1233animal modelsperiosteal distraction osteogenesisosteogenic distractionbone regenerationsystematic review
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mario García-González
Fernando Muñoz
Antonio González-Cantalapiedra
Mónica López-Peña
Nikola Saulacic
spellingShingle Mario García-González
Fernando Muñoz
Antonio González-Cantalapiedra
Mónica López-Peña
Nikola Saulacic
Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
Animals
animal models
periosteal distraction osteogenesis
osteogenic distraction
bone regeneration
systematic review
author_facet Mario García-González
Fernando Muñoz
Antonio González-Cantalapiedra
Mónica López-Peña
Nikola Saulacic
author_sort Mario García-González
title Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
title_short Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
title_full Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
title_fullStr Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
title_full_unstemmed Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation Using ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines on Animal Models Used for Periosteal Distraction Osteogenesis
title_sort systematic review and quality evaluation using arrive 2.0 guidelines on animal models used for periosteal distraction osteogenesis
publisher MDPI AG
series Animals
issn 2076-2615
publishDate 2021-04-01
description 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.
topic animal models
periosteal distraction osteogenesis
osteogenic distraction
bone regeneration
systematic review
url https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/5/1233
work_keys_str_mv AT mariogarciagonzalez systematicreviewandqualityevaluationusingarrive20guidelinesonanimalmodelsusedforperiostealdistractionosteogenesis
AT fernandomunoz systematicreviewandqualityevaluationusingarrive20guidelinesonanimalmodelsusedforperiostealdistractionosteogenesis
AT antoniogonzalezcantalapiedra systematicreviewandqualityevaluationusingarrive20guidelinesonanimalmodelsusedforperiostealdistractionosteogenesis
AT monicalopezpena systematicreviewandqualityevaluationusingarrive20guidelinesonanimalmodelsusedforperiostealdistractionosteogenesis
AT nikolasaulacic systematicreviewandqualityevaluationusingarrive20guidelinesonanimalmodelsusedforperiostealdistractionosteogenesis
_version_ 1721510843231764480