Do different reperfusion methods affect the outcomes of stroke induced by MCAO in adult rats?

Abstract

There are two patterns of ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) models used in rat middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) I/R models, which differ in the use of unilateral or bilateral carotid artery reperfusion. The primary difference between the two patterns of I/R models is the complexity of the surgery procedure. However, researchers in this field have no idea whether there are any differences in outcomes of these two methods. In this study, we investigated the effects of the two methods on neurological deficits, infarct volume, blood-brain barrier (BBB) integrity and brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) expression. Through evaluating the current way of bilateral common carotid artery reperfusion, we tried to find whether it could be replaced by an easier way. We found that there were no statistical significant differences between the different methods in infarct volume, neurological deficits, BBB integrity, and the level of BDNF (P > 0.05). These data demonstrated that different methods did not affect the neurological deficits, infarct volume, BBB integrity, and the BDNF protein level, which provides reference when we use an experimental stroke. These results suggest that the two methods have similar capability for inducing cerebral I/R injury and can be interchanged.

Distinctions between the Koizumi and Zea Longa methods for middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) model: a systematic review and meta-analysis of rodent data

“…Infarction rate 3. NDS (Zea Longa score) Zuo Xialin 2013 26 SD rats (male, 250–280 g) Chloral hydrate 1. Processing: tip coated with solid paraffin; 2.…”

“… 15 + + + + + + + 7 2015 Smith, H.K. 24 + + + + 4 2016 Zheng Jianfeng 25 + + + + + + 6 2016 Zuo Xialin 26 + + + + + + + 7 2016 Cai Qiang 13 + + + + + 5 2017 Melissa, T.L. 36 + + + + ...…”

“…Nine studies 12 , 14 , 19 , 21 , 23 , 26 , 31 – 33 reported the occurrence of SAH after the operation, and one study 33 was excluded due to a lack of detailed data. Overall, the meta-analysis results indicate that the modeling method of MCAO-KM causes a lower probability of SAH compared to the MCAO-LG with no substantial heterogeneity (RR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.20, 0.90], p = 0.02, heterogeneity I 2 = 0%, p = 0.96) (Fig.…”

“…Eleven studies 12 , 14 , 15 , 21 , 24 , 26 – 28 , 37 – 39 evaluated the cerebral infarction rates between two modeling methods (Table 4 ), and one study 27 was excluded due to lack of sample size. Overall, the cerebral infarction rates of the MCAO-KM were markedly lower than the MCAO-LG (MD = − 3.37; 95% CI [− 4.71, − 2.04], p < 0.00001; heterogeneity I 2 = 82%, p < 0.00001).…”

Comparison of middle cerebral artery occlusion models conducted by Koizumi and Longa methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of rodent data

“…The MCAO-KM and MCAO-LG modeling methods are the two most common ways of achieving MCAO as classical surgical approaches in preclinical experiments, and they are invaluable for researchers to understand stroke patho-physiology and develop new therapeutics. However, in preclinical studies, the two classic intraluminal lament approaches for MCAO are considered alternatives, and some researchers even believed that they are interchangeable [24,31]. Therefore, it is critical to distinguish between them in order to develop an appropriate stroke model.…”