TY - JOUR
T1 - Transient filament occlusion of the middle cerebral artery in rats
T2 - Does the reperfusion method matter 24 hours after perfusion?
AU - Liu, Jian Ren
AU - Jensen-Kondering, Ulf R.
AU - Zhou, Jia Jun
AU - Sun, Fen
AU - Feng, Xiao Yan
AU - Shen, Xiao Lei
AU - Deuschl, Günther
AU - Jansen, Olav
AU - Herdegen, Thomas
AU - Meyne, Johannes
AU - Zhao, Yi
AU - Eschenfelder, Christoph
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the China Visiting Scholars Program, Campus Kiel, Germany and grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [No. 81070914 and 81271302 to J.R. Liu]; and a grant from the “New One Hundred Talent Project” from Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China [2012, to J.R. Liu].
PY - 2012/12/29
Y1 - 2012/12/29
N2 - Background: There are two widely used transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) methods, which differ in the use of unilateral or bilateral carotid artery reperfusion (UNICAR and BICAR). Of the two methods, UNICAR is easier to perform. This study was designed to comprehensively compare the two reperfusion methods to determine if there are any differences in outcomes.Results: The UNICAR and BICAR groups each included 9 rats. At baseline, the average pO2 was 20.54 ± 9.35 and 26.43 ± 7.39, for the UNICAR and BICAR groups, respectively (P = 0.519). Changes in pO2, as well as other physiological parameters measured within the ischemic lesion, were similar between the UNICAR and BICAR groups during 90 min of MCAO and the first 30 min of reperfusion (all P > 0.05). Furthermore, both the Bederson score and Garcia score, which are used for neurological assessment, were also similar (both P > 0.05). There were also no significant differences in T2WI lesion volume, DWI lesion volume, PWI lesion volume, or TTC staining infarct volume between the two groups (all P > 0.05).Conclusion: UNICAR and BICAR have similar capability for inducing acute brain ischemic injury and can be considered interchangeable up to 24 hours after reperfusion.
AB - Background: There are two widely used transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) methods, which differ in the use of unilateral or bilateral carotid artery reperfusion (UNICAR and BICAR). Of the two methods, UNICAR is easier to perform. This study was designed to comprehensively compare the two reperfusion methods to determine if there are any differences in outcomes.Results: The UNICAR and BICAR groups each included 9 rats. At baseline, the average pO2 was 20.54 ± 9.35 and 26.43 ± 7.39, for the UNICAR and BICAR groups, respectively (P = 0.519). Changes in pO2, as well as other physiological parameters measured within the ischemic lesion, were similar between the UNICAR and BICAR groups during 90 min of MCAO and the first 30 min of reperfusion (all P > 0.05). Furthermore, both the Bederson score and Garcia score, which are used for neurological assessment, were also similar (both P > 0.05). There were also no significant differences in T2WI lesion volume, DWI lesion volume, PWI lesion volume, or TTC staining infarct volume between the two groups (all P > 0.05).Conclusion: UNICAR and BICAR have similar capability for inducing acute brain ischemic injury and can be considered interchangeable up to 24 hours after reperfusion.
KW - Bilateral Carotid reperfusion
KW - Diffusion weighted imaging
KW - Ischemia
KW - Middle cerebral artery occlusion
KW - Neurological deficits
KW - Partial oxygen pressure
KW - Perfusion weighted imaging
KW - Reperfusion method
KW - Unilateral Carotid reperfusion
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871544170&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1471-2202-13-154
DO - 10.1186/1471-2202-13-154
M3 - Article
C2 - 23272656
AN - SCOPUS:84871544170
SN - 1471-2202
VL - 13
JO - BMC Neuroscience
JF - BMC Neuroscience
IS - 1
M1 - 154
ER -