Harmonization of Lesion Nomenclature in Laboratory Animals

  • Joshua T. BartoeEmail author
  • Cynthia S. Cook
  • Martin Bussieres
  • Robert J. Munger
  • Michael H. Brown


The goal of this chapter is to provide consensus for the harmonization of preclinical terminology for ultimate adoption on studies submitted to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other global regulatory agencies. Included is a list of descriptive-based terminology for anatomical subsections of the eye with associated definitions and synonyms. We are recommending use of this harmonized terminology for description of common lesions observed spontaneously or associated with test article-induced changes. The tables provided contain listings for all necessary base-root lesions, while recommended modifiers are addressed in the section text. Additionally, there are representative images for selected lesions to provide the reader specific examples of the ocular changes they may encounter on ophthalmology examinations.


Terminology Ocular lesions Laboratory animal Ocular toxicology Harmonization 



The authors wish to thank Drs. David Wilkie, Roy Bellhorn, and Randy Sharp for generously providing images, Dr. Craig Zwickle (Chair SEND CT) for a detail discussion regarding the SEND terminology approval process, and Dr. John Vahle (Member INHAND GESC) for providing a historical perspective of the INHAND effort.


  1. 1.
    Van Herck H, et al. Histological changes in the orbital region of rats after orbital puncture. Lab Anim. 1992;26(1):53–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Timm KI. Orbital venous anatomy of the rat. Lab Anim Sci. 1979;29(5):636–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Timm KI. Orbital venous anatomy of the Mongolian gerbil with comparison to the mouse, hamster and rat. Lab Anim Sci. 1989;39(3):262–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Djeridane Y. The harderian gland of desert rodents: a histological and ultrastructural study. J Anat. 1992;180(Pt 3):465–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Djeridane Y. Comparative histological and ultrastructural studies of the harderian gland of rodents. Microsc Res Tech. 1996;34(1):28–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhatt PN, Percy DH, Jonas AM. Characterization of the virus of sialodacryoadenitis of rats: a member of the coronavirus group. J Infect Dis. 1972;126(2):123–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacoby RO, Bhatt PN, Jonas AM. Pathogenesis of sialodacryoadenitis in gnotobiotic rats. Vet Pathol. 1975;12:196.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weisbroth SH, Peress N. Ophthalmic lesions and dacryoadenitis: a naturally occurring aspect of sialodacryoadenitis virus infection of the laboratory rat. Lab Anim Sci. 1977;27(4):466–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Percy DH, et al. Comparison of strain susceptibility to experimental sialodacryoadenitis in rats. Lab Anim Sci. 1984;34(3):255–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Percy DH, Wojcinski ZW, Schunk MK. Sequential changes in the harderian and exorbital lacrimal glands in Wistar rats infected with sialodacryoadenitis virus. Vet Pathol. 1989;26(3):238–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burling K, et al. Anatomy of the rabbit nasolacrimal duct and its clinical implications. Vet Comp Ophthalmol. 1991;1(1):33–40.Google Scholar

For Additional Information of the SEND and INHAND Initiatives, Please See These Additional Resources:

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua T. Bartoe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cynthia S. Cook
    • 2
  • Martin Bussieres
    • 3
  • Robert J. Munger
    • 4
  • Michael H. Brown
    • 5
  1. 1.MPI ResearchMattawanUSA
  2. 2.Veterinary Vision, Inc.San CarlosUSA
  3. 3.V&O Services Inc.Saint-LazareCanada
  4. 4.Animal Ophthalmology ClinicDallasUSA
  5. 5.Animal Eye Center of New JerseyLittle FallsUSA

Personalised recommendations