Performances assessment of Anipill® device prototype designed for continuous temperature monitoring

This study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the latest version of the Anipill® device including a calibration assessment step and an in-vivo testing in rodents. After performing a calibration procedure, 10 rats were intraperitoneally implanted with a pair of sensors, one Anipill® (8.2 mm diameter, 17.2 mm length) and one Jonah® (8.7 mm diameter, 23 mm length). Temperature data were collected and compared during both a 24 h period of free ranging and after an injection of Lipopolysaccharide d’Escherichia coli, serotype 0111:B4 (LPS) and Apomorphine hydrochloride. Furthermore, the transmission distance of Anipill® was assessed by moving the animal compound away from the data logger. The results of the calibration process indicate a significant average difference between Anipill® and Jonah® of .04 ± .04 °C. During free ranging, the mean inter-sensors difference observed was −.1 ± .1 °C. Nevertheless, the instantaneous difference values between devices could sometimes reach .96 °C (.2 < 90% interquantile range <1.1 °C). Concerning the pharmacological effect periods, the mean difference observed was −.01 °C ± .1 °C during the Apomorphine phase and −.09 °C ± .08 °C during the LPS phase. However, the instantaneous difference values between devices could sometimes reach .6 °C (.2 < 90% interquantile range <1.2 °C) and .7 °C (.3 < 90% interquantile range <.8 °C) during Apomorphine and LPS phases respectively. The observed differences exceeding 1 °C cannot wholly be explained by the sensors’ variability but rather by animal physiology. Concerning the transmission distance assessment, 48% of the data were still collected when the distance between the animal and the Anipill® receptor reached 5 m. Anipill® possesses some advantages against Jonah, notably a greater transmission distance and battery life, and a self-memory.

[1]  A. Gauthier,et al.  Performance testing of an innovative telemetric temperature sensor in animals , 2012 .

[2]  E. Kiyatkin,et al.  Procedure of rectal temperature measurement affects brain, muscle, skin, and body temperatures and modulates the effects of intravenous cocaine , 2007, Brain Research.

[3]  L. Duchateau,et al.  Intraperitoneal versus subcutaneous telemetry devices in young Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) , 2007, Laboratory animals.

[4]  D. Bishop,et al.  Core temperature and hydration status during an Ironman triathlon , 2006, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[5]  J. E. McKenzie,et al.  Validation of a new telemetric core temperature monitor , 2004 .

[6]  Lisa R Leon,et al.  Biotelemetry transmitter implantation in rodents: impact on growth and circadian rhythms. , 2004, American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology.

[7]  James M. O'Donnell,et al.  A study of VitalView™ for behavioural and physiological monitoring in laboratory rats , 2002, Physiology & Behavior.

[8]  F Halberg,et al.  Methods for cosinor-rhythmometry. , 1979, Chronobiologia.

[9]  P. Lomax Measurement of ‘Core’ Temperature in the Rat , 1966, Nature.

[10]  C. P. Bogerd,et al.  Validity, Reliability, and Inertia of Four Different Temperature Capsule Systems , 2018, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[11]  A. Bast,et al.  Doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity monitored by ECG in freely moving mice A new model to test potential protectors , 1996, Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology.

[12]  J De Prins,et al.  Sightseeing around the single cosinor. , 1993, Chronobiology international.

[13]  S. Donhoffer Homeothermia of the brain : cerebral blood flow, metabolic rate, and brain temperature in the cold : the possible role of neuroglia , 1980 .