Experimental Joint Immobilization and Remobilization in the Rats

Kojima, Satoshi; Hoso, Masahiro; Watanabe, Masanori; Matsuzaki, Taro; Hibino, Itaru; Sasaki, Kentaro

doi:10.1589/jpts.26.865

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While many studies report improved cartilage repair in defects positioned in the trochlear over the femoral condyle (Orth et al 2013a ), conflicting results, where less defect repair occurs in the trochlea compared to the medial condyle have also been reported (Hoemann et al 2011 ; Hoemann et al 2005 ). In the clinical scenario most operators will follow surgery with a 4–6 week period of partial-weight bearing with full range of motion in the joint, slowly working up to full weight bearing (Vogt et al 2013 ) even though short term studies have shown an accelerated rehab protocol can reduce pain and increase function (Vogt et al 2013 ; Ebert et al 2008 ) In the preclinical in vivo model weight bearing can be controlled by using external fixators and casts on the animals (Kojima et al 2014 ; Roth et al 1988 ). Confining animals to pens for the initial post-operative period has been shown to be effective in reducing post-operative joint load (Etterlin et al 2014 ).…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Post-operative rehabilitation of cartilage repair in humans varies from centre to centre, it has been shown free movement and gradual increase in weight bearing improves outcomes, however, this is complex to ensure in animal models (Nishino et al 2010 ; Assche et al 2011 ). When using an in vivo model casts can be used to immobilise rat limbs (Kojima et al 2014 ; Maldonado et al 2013 ), however it is more common in large animals such as goats and sheep to keep them in small pens in the immediate post-operative period (Marmotti et al 2013 ) to limit their mobilising. In some animals, such as horses, non-weight bearing is impossible, and can cause severe life-threatening illnesses.…”

Section: Operative Factors Influencing Model Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The benefits and limitations of animal models for translational research in cartilage repair

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much research is currently ongoing into new therapies for cartilage defect repair with new biomaterials frequently appearing which purport to have significant regenerative capacity. These biomaterials may be classified as medical devices, and as such must undergo rigorous testing before they are implanted in humans. A large part of this testing involves in vitro trials and biomechanical testing. However, in order to bridge the gap between the lab and the clinic, in vivo preclinical trials are required, and usually demanded by regulatory approval bodies. This review examines the in vivo models in current use for cartilage defect repair testing and the relevance of each in the context of generated results and applicability to bringing the device to clinical practice. Some of the preclinical models currently used include murine, leporine, ovine, caprine, porcine, canine, and equine models. Each of these has advantages and disadvantages in terms of animal husbandry, cartilage thickness, joint biomechanics and ethical and licencing issues. This review will examine the strengths and weaknesses of the various animal models currently in use in preclinical studies of cartilage repair.

show abstract

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Operative Factors Influencing Model Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The benefits and limitations of animal models for translational research in cartilage repair

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One study by Trudel et al separately analyzed the recovery of myogenic and arthrogenic contractures following remobilization, and found that arthrogenic contracture progressed as a result of joint remobilization, following short‐term immobilization (less than 4 weeks). There are some studies reporting histological changes in joint capsules during remobilization, but the changes responsible for the remobilization‐induced aggravation of arthrogenic contracture have not yet been identified. Michelson and Hunneyball observed the development of inflammation in the immobilized joint capsules of rabbits, and found that subsequent remobilization further aggravated the synovitis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of arthrogenic joint contracture as a result of pathological changes in remobilized rat knees

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to elucidate how rats recover from immobilization-induced knee joint contracture. Rats' right knees were immobilized by an external fixator at a flexion of 140° for 3 weeks. After removal of the fixator, the joints were allowed to move freely (remobilization) for 0, 1, 3, 7, or 14 days (n = 5 each). To distinguish myogenic and arthrogenic contractures, the passive extension range of motion was measured before and after myotomy of the knee flexors. Knee joints were histologically analyzed and the expression of genes encoding inflammatory or fibrosis-related mediators, interleukin-1β (1L-1β), fibrosis-related transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1), and collagen type I (COL1A1) and III (COL3A1), were examined in the knee joint posterior capsules using real-time PCR. Both myogenic and arthrogenic contractures were established within 3 weeks of immobilization. During remobilization, the myogenic contracture decreased over time. In contrast, the arthrogenic contracture developed further during the remobilization period. On day 1 of remobilization, inflammatory changes characterized by edema, inflammatory cell infiltration, and upregulation of IL-1β gene started in the knee joint posterior capsule. In addition, collagen deposition accompanied by fibroblast proliferation, with upregulation of TGF-β1, COL1A1, and COL3A1 genes, appeared in the joint capsule between days 7 and 14. These results suggest the progression of arthrogenic contracture following remobilization, which is characterized by fibrosis development, is possibly triggered by inflammation in the joint capsule. It is therefore necessary to focus on developing new treatment strategies for immobilization-induced joint contracture. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:1414-1423, 2017.

show abstract

“…The heads of the animals are also fixed with a metal loop over the neck region to restrict head movements (9). Currently, immobilization stress can also be induced by fixing the limbs of the animal in an adjustable plastic bag, a transparent plexiglass cylinder or other equipment (12,23,24). Restraint stress is generally performed by keeping the animals in small wire mesh cages, a cylindrical or semi-cylindrical tube with ventilation holes for a stipulated period of time (25)(26)(27).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

İki Kronik İmmobilizasyon Stres Protokolünün Erkek Sıçanlarda Depresyon/Anksiyete Benzeri Davranışlar Üzerine Etkilerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Şahin¹,

Özkürkçüler²,

Koç³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The effect of acute and chronic stress models on depression and/or anxiety-like behavior in rodents has been widely studied, but with contradictory results. This may be due to differences in the sex and age of the animals studied or inherent differences in the stress models used. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of two immobilization stress protocols on depression/anxiety-like behaviors in adult male rats. Materials and Methods: Adult Wistar rats were randomly divided into three groups (n=10) comprising: control, immobilization stress-1 (45 minutes daily for a period of ten days), and immobilization stress-2 (45 minutes twice a day for a period of ten days). Stress-related behavior was evaluated by means of the open field and forced swim tests. In addition, change in body weight, fasting blood glucose, and serum corticosterone were measured. Results: In the open field test, the percentage of time spent in the central area and mean velocity were significantly lower in the immobilization stress-1 and immobilization stress-2 groups as compared to the control group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). Movement ratios were lower in both immobilization stress groups than in the control group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively). In the forced swim test, the duration of swimming, climbing and immobility behavior in both immobilization stress protocols did not differ from the control group. Serum corticosterone levels were higher in the immobilization stress-1 and immobilization stress-2 groups than in the control group (p <0.05), but no overt differences were determined in the percentage change in body weight or the fasting blood glucose level between the stress protocol groups and the control group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: We may conclude that immobilization stress-1 and immobilization stress-2 protocols do not cause depression-like behavior in adult male rats. However, anxiety-like behaviors predominated in both stress protocol groups.

show abstract

Experimental Joint Immobilization and Remobilization in the Rats

Cited by 23 publications

References 11 publications

The benefits and limitations of animal models for translational research in cartilage repair

The benefits and limitations of animal models for translational research in cartilage repair

Development of arthrogenic joint contracture as a result of pathological changes in remobilized rat knees

İki Kronik İmmobilizasyon Stres Protokolünün Erkek Sıçanlarda Depresyon/Anksiyete Benzeri Davranışlar Üzerine Etkilerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About