Sympathetic discharge and hypertensive crisis often accompany brain death, causing neurogenic pulmonary edema. Progressive systemic inflammatory response develops, which can injure the lung further. We investigated whether (a) early hemodynamic injury during donor brain death increases reperfusion injury after lung transplantation and (b) delaying lung recovery would augment reperfusion injury further, because of the progressive systemic inflammatory response in the donor. Brain death was induced by intracranial balloon inflation in rats, with or without alpha-adrenergic blockade pretreatment to prevent the hypertensive crisis. Another group of rats had a sham procedure. Lungs were retrieved 15 min after brain death or sham procedure and reperfused using recipient rats. In a fourth group, brain death was induced and the lungs were retrieved 5 h after brain death and reperfused. Postreperfusion, lungs retrieved early from untreated brain-dead donors developed more severe reperfusion injury, as assessed by functional parameters and inflammatory markers, than those from sham or alpha-blockade-treated donors. Lungs retrieved late from brain-dead donors had similar inflammatory markers after reperfusion to those retrieved early, but significantly lower pulmonary vascular resistance. Early hemodynamic damage during donor brain death increases reperfusion injury after lung transplantation. Delaying retrieval may allow the lung to recover from the hemodynamic injury.

Millions of laboratory animals are killed each year worldwide. There is an ethical, and in many countries also a legal, imperative to ensure those deaths cause minimal suffering. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding what methods of killing are humane for many species and stages of development. In 2013, an international group of researchers and stakeholders met at Newcastle University, United Kingdom to discuss the latest research and which methods could currently be considered most humane for the most commonly used laboratory species (mice, rats and zebrafish). They also discussed factors to consider when making decisions about appropriate techniques for particular species and projects, and priorities for further research. This report summarises the research findings and discussions, with recommendations to help inform good practice for humane killing.

The use of carbon dioxide (CO₂) for stunning and killing animals is considered to compromise welfare due to air hunger, anxiety, fear, and pain. Despite decades of research, no alternatives have so far been found that provide a safe and reliable way to induce unconsciousness in groups of animals, and also cause less distress than CO₂. Here, we revisit the current and historical literature to identify key research questions that may lead to the identification and implementation of more humane alternatives to induce unconsciousness in mice, rats, poultry, and pigs. In addition to the evaluation of novel methods and agents, we identify the need to standardise the terminology and behavioural assays within the field. We further reason that more accurate measurements of consciousness state are needed and serve as a central component in the assessment of suffering. Therefore, we propose a roadmap toward improving animal welfare during end-of-life procedures.

Over 234,000 rats were used in regulated procedures in the UK in 2014, many of which may have resulted in some degree of pain. When using animals in research, there is an ethical and legal responsibility to alleviate or at least reduce pain to an absolute minimum. To do this, we must be able to effectively assess pain in an accurate and timely manner. The Rat Grimace Scale (RGS) is a pain assessment tool, which is suggested to be both accurate and rapid in pain assessment. Many procedures involve the use of general anaesthesia. To date, the effects of anaesthesia on the RGS have not been assessed, limiting its potential utility for assessing pain following anaesthesia. Forty-eight Lister hooded rats were used in this study (24 in part A and 24 in a separate part B). Rats were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups in part A; short duration isoflurane exposure, short duration control exposure (air) and one of two treatment groups in part B; surgical duration isoflurane exposure or surgical duration control exposure (oxygen). Rats were placed into an anaesthetic induction chamber and isoflurane, or control gas piped into the chamber for either 4 (short duration exposure) or 12 minutes (surgical duration exposure). Following recovery, photographs of the rats’ faces were taken and then scored blindly using the RGS. Short duration isoflurane anaesthesia had no effect on RGS scores. However, when rats are anaesthetised for a longer duration, akin to a simple routine surgical procedure, the RGS score increases significantly and this increase remains on repeated exposure to this duration of anaesthesia over a 4-day period. This should be accounted for when using the RGS to assess pain in rats in the immediate time period following procedures involving the use of isoflurane anaesthesia.