EXPERIMENTAL MICE SEPSIS MODELS: ADVANTAGES AND PITFALLS
- Authors: Starkina O.V.1, Ilyukina N.A.1, Vassilev T.L.1
-
Affiliations:
- Lobachevsky State University of Nizhniy Novgorod
- Issue: Vol 22, No 2-1 (2019)
- Pages: 566-568
- Section: ORIGINAL ARTICLES
- URL: https://ogarev-online.ru/1028-7221/article/view/120303
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S102872210006976-8
- ID: 120303
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Sepsis is studied in vivo by using experimental mice models. The golden standard is the model which utilizes peritonitis induction by cecal ligation and puncture. Lipopolysacharide injection is often used for induction of septic process as well. Currently, the researches discuss disadvantages of these models and poor modeling capability of mice sepsis compared to septic processes which take place in humans. The throughout discussion is present in the article by Cavaillon J. M. “New Approaches to Treat Sepsis: Animal Models Do Not Work” [1]. In this review the author questioned the sepsis animal models used nowadays, but he didn’t mentioned the experimental model described by Gonnert F. A. et al. in their work «Characteristics of Clinical Sepsis Refl ected in a Reliable and Reproducible Rodent Sepsis Model». Our review briefl y discusses the advantages of this model compared to the other animal sepsis models.
Keywords
About the authors
O. V. Starkina
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhniy Novgorod
Author for correspondence.
Email: fake@neicon.ru
junior scientist, Neurotechnologies Department,
Nizhniy Novgorod
Russian FederationN. A. Ilyukina
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhniy Novgorod
Email: fake@neicon.ru
student,
Nizhniy Novgorod
Russian FederationT. L. Vassilev
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhniy Novgorod
Email: tchavdarv@gmail.com
senior scientist, Neurotechnologies Department,
Nizhniy Novgorod
Russian FederationReferences
- Jean-Marc Cavaillon. New Approaches to Treat Sepsis: Animal Models «Do Not Work» (Review), General Reanimatology, 2018, 14; 3.
- Jean-Louis Vincent. Increasing awareness of sepsis: World Sepsis Day, Critical Care. 2012, 16:152.
- Gingles N. A., Alexander J. E., Kadioglu A., Andrew P. W., Kerr A., Mitchell T. J., Hopes E., Denny P., Brown S., Jones H. B., Little S., Booth G. C., McPheat W. L. Role of genetic resistance in invasive pneumococcal infection: identification and study of susceptibility and resistance in inbred mouse strains. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69 (1): 426–34.
- Angele M. K., Pratschke S., Hubbard W. J., Chaudry I. H. Gender differences in sepsis: cardiovascular and immunological aspects. Virulence. 2014,1; 5(1):12–9.
- Falk A. Gonnert M. D., Peter Recknagel, Madlen Seidel, Nayla Jbeily, M. S., Katja Dahlke, Clemens L. Bockmeyer, M.D., Johannes Winning, M.D, Wolfgang Losche, M.D., Ralf A. Claus and Michael Bauer, M.D. Characteristics of Clinical Sepsis Reflected in a Reliable and Reproducible Rodent Sepsis Model, Journal of Surgical Research. 2011, 170, 123.
- Dyson A., Singer M. Animal models of sepsis: Why does preclinical efficacy fail to translate to the clinical setting? Crit Care Med. 2009,;37(1 Suppl):30–7.
- Dan M., Richardson J., Miliotis M. D., Koornhof H. J. Comparison of preservation media and freezing conditions for storage of specimens of feces, J Med Microbiol. 1989, 28(2):151–4.
Supplementary files
