Why the study?
The expansion of the vascular physiology field has raised concerns over scientific rigor and reproducibility, necessitating guidelines for best practices in evaluating vascular function in isolated vessels.
Establishes standardized guidelines for evaluating ex vivo vascular function to improve scientific rigor and reproducibility in vascular physiology.
Adoption will boost reproducibility of ex vivo vascular data; extends expert consensus on methodological standards for cardiovascular research.
The measurement of vascular function in isolated vessels has revealed important insights into the structural, functional, and biomechanical features of the normal and diseased cardiovascular system and has provided a molecular understanding of the cells that constitutes arteries and veins and their interaction. Further, this approach has allowed the discovery of vital pharmacological treatments for cardiovascular diseases. However, the expansion of the vascular physiology field has also brought new concerns over scientific rigor and reproducibility. Therefore, it is appropriate to set guidelines for the best practices of evaluating vascular function in isolated vessels. These guidelines are a comprehensive document detailing the best practices and pitfalls for the assessment of function in large and small arteries and veins. Herein, we bring together experts in the field of vascular physiology with the purpose of developing guidelines for evaluating ex vivo vascular function. By using this document, vascular physiologists will have consistency among methodological approaches, producing more reliable and reproducible results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wenceslau et al. (2021) conducted a review in Vascular function and structure assessment. Guidelines for ex vivo vascular function evaluation was evaluated. Comprehensive guidelines were developed by experts to standardize methodological approaches for evaluating ex vivo vascular function in isolated arteries and veins to improve reproducibility.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: