|
|
|
|
|
Comparison on two kinds of spinal cord injury model in mice with self-made spinal impactor device |
CHEN Xue-zhou, BI Yi-hui, ZHANG Ke-ke, DONG Zhou, ZHANG Ming-kai, YOU Tao |
The Department of Orthopedics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230022, China |
|
|
Abstract Objective Comparison of two kinds of spinal cord injury models with the self-made spinal impactor device, in order to establish an improving method. Methods Thirty mice were divided into 3 groups randomly: group A: incision without contusing spinal cord, group B: encroach for thoracic fenestration with contusing method by the self-made spinal device, group C: through intervertebral foramen with contusing method by the self-made spinal device. Intraoperative times, the length of the incision and blood loss were recorded. Basso mouse scale(BMS), footprint analysis, histology were performed to evaluate spinal cord severity. Results Group C mice showed better results in intraoperative time(36.4±5.21)min, the length of the incision(1.32±0.08)cm and blood loss(0.24±0.05)mL versus those indexes of group B(P<0.05). Locomotor testing and histology revealed that the SCI models can
be established via the two methods. Conclusion A simple and stable spinal cord injury free from laminectomy can be made with the self-made device. The method is simpler and can mimic the clinical situation.
|
Received: 18 December 2015
|
Corresponding Authors:
YOU Tao, E-mail: youtaowh@163.com
|
|
|
|
[1] Kuo CY, Liou TH, Chang KH, et al. Functioning and disability analysis of patients with traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury by using the world health organization disability assessment schedule 2.0[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2015, 12(4):4116-4127.
[2] Kirchberger I, Sinnott A, Charlifue S, et al. Functioning and disability in spinal cord injury from the consumer perspective: an international qualitative study using focus groups and the ICF[J]. Spinal Cord, 2010, 48(8):603-613.
[3] Zou Y, Stagi M, Wang X, et al. Gene-Silencing Screen for Mammalian Axon Regeneration Identifies Inpp5f (Sac2) as an Endogenous Suppressor of Repair after Spinal Cord Injury[J]. J Neurosci, 2015,35(29):10 429-10 439.
[4] Basso DM, Fisher LC, Anderson AJ, et al. Basso Mouse Scale for locomotion detects differences in recovery after spinal cord injury in five common mouse strains[J]. J Neurotrauma, 2006, 23(5):635-659.
[5] Ma M, Basso DM, Walters P, et al. Behavioral and histological outcomes following graded spinal cord contusion injury in the C57Bl/6 mouse[J]. Exp Neurol, 2001, 169(2):239-254.
[6] Nori S, Okada Y, Yasuda A, et al. Grafted human-induced pluripotent stem-cell-derived neurospheres promote motor functional recovery after spinal cord injury in mice[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,2011, 108(40):16 825-16 830.
[7] Allen AR. Surgery of experimental lesion of spinal cord equivalent to crush injury of fracture dislocation of spinal colum[J]. Prelimainary report. JAMA, 1911, 57:878-880.
[8] Basso DM, Beattie MS, Bresnahan JC. Graded histological and locomotor outcomes after spinal cord contusion using the NYU weightdrop device versus transection[J]. Exp Neurol, 1996, 139(2):244-256.
[9] Streijger F, Beernink TM, Lee JH, et al. Characterization of a cervical spinal cord hemicontusion injury in mice using the infinite horizon impactor[J]. J Neurotrauma, 2013, 30(10):869-883.
[10] Bhatnagar T, Liu J, Oxland T. Characterization of a novel, magnetic resonance imaging- compatible rodent model spinal cord injury device[J]. J Biomech Eng, 2014, 136(9):095 001.
[11] Fukuda S, Nakamura T, Kishigami Y, et al. New canine spinal cord injury model free from laminectomy[J]. Brain Res Brain Res Protoc, 2005, 14(3):171-180.
[12] Lim JH, Jung CS, Byeon YE, et al. Establishment of a canine spinal cord injury model induced by epidural balloon compression[J]. J Vet Sci, 2007, 8(1):89-94.
[13] Lee JH, Choi CB, Chung DJ, et al. Development of an improved canine model of percutaneous spinal cord compression injury by balloon catheter[J]. J Neurosci Methods, 2008, 167(2):310-316. |
|
|
|