OBJECTIVE: To identify the optimal mouse model for hind limb ischaemia, which offers a therapeutic window that is large enough to detect improvements of blood flow recovery, for example, using cell therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Different surgical approaches were performed: single coagulation of femoral and iliac artery, total excision of femoral artery and double coagulation of femoral and iliac artery. Blood flow restoration was analysed with laser Doppler perfusion imaging (LDPI). Immuno-histochemical stainings, angiography and micro-computed tomography (CT) scans were performed for visualisation of collaterals in the mouse. RESULTS: Significant differences in flow restoration were observed depending on the surgical procedure. After single coagulation, blood flow already restored 100% in 7 days, in contrast to a significant delayed flow restoration after double coagulation (54% after 28 days, P<0.001). After total excision, blood flow was 100% recovered within 28 days. Compared with total excision, double coagulation displayed more pronounced corkscrew phenotype of the vessels typical for collateral arteries on angiographs. CONCLUSION: The extent of the arterial injury is associated with different patterns of perfusion restoration. The double coagulation mouse model is, in our hands, the best model for studying new therapeutic approaches as it offers a therapeutic window in which improvements can be monitored efficiently.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the optimal mouse model for hind limb ischaemia, which offers a therapeutic window that is large enough to detect improvements of blood flow recovery, for example, using cell therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Different surgical approaches were performed: single coagulation of femoral and iliac artery, total excision of femoral artery and double coagulation of femoral and iliac artery. Blood flow restoration was analysed with laser Doppler perfusion imaging (LDPI). Immuno-histochemical stainings, angiography and micro-computed tomography (CT) scans were performed for visualisation of collaterals in the mouse. RESULTS: Significant differences in flow restoration were observed depending on the surgical procedure. After single coagulation, blood flow already restored 100% in 7 days, in contrast to a significant delayed flow restoration after double coagulation (54% after 28 days, P<0.001). After total excision, blood flow was 100% recovered within 28 days. Compared with total excision, double coagulation displayed more pronounced corkscrew phenotype of the vessels typical for collateral arteries on angiographs. CONCLUSION: The extent of the arterial injury is associated with different patterns of perfusion restoration. The double coagulation mouse model is, in our hands, the best model for studying new therapeutic approaches as it offers a therapeutic window in which improvements can be monitored efficiently.
Authors: Patrycja Nowak-Sliwinska; Kari Alitalo; Elizabeth Allen; Andrey Anisimov; Alfred C Aplin; Robert Auerbach; Hellmut G Augustin; David O Bates; Judy R van Beijnum; R Hugh F Bender; Gabriele Bergers; Andreas Bikfalvi; Joyce Bischoff; Barbara C Böck; Peter C Brooks; Federico Bussolino; Bertan Cakir; Peter Carmeliet; Daniel Castranova; Anca M Cimpean; Ondine Cleaver; George Coukos; George E Davis; Michele De Palma; Anna Dimberg; Ruud P M Dings; Valentin Djonov; Andrew C Dudley; Neil P Dufton; Sarah-Maria Fendt; Napoleone Ferrara; Marcus Fruttiger; Dai Fukumura; Bart Ghesquière; Yan Gong; Robert J Griffin; Adrian L Harris; Christopher C W Hughes; Nan W Hultgren; M Luisa Iruela-Arispe; Melita Irving; Rakesh K Jain; Raghu Kalluri; Joanna Kalucka; Robert S Kerbel; Jan Kitajewski; Ingeborg Klaassen; Hynda K Kleinmann; Pieter Koolwijk; Elisabeth Kuczynski; Brenda R Kwak; Koen Marien; Juan M Melero-Martin; Lance L Munn; Roberto F Nicosia; Agnes Noel; Jussi Nurro; Anna-Karin Olsson; Tatiana V Petrova; Kristian Pietras; Roberto Pili; Jeffrey W Pollard; Mark J Post; Paul H A Quax; Gabriel A Rabinovich; Marius Raica; Anna M Randi; Domenico Ribatti; Curzio Ruegg; Reinier O Schlingemann; Stefan Schulte-Merker; Lois E H Smith; Jonathan W Song; Steven A Stacker; Jimmy Stalin; Amber N Stratman; Maureen Van de Velde; Victor W M van Hinsbergh; Peter B Vermeulen; Johannes Waltenberger; Brant M Weinstein; Hong Xin; Bahar Yetkin-Arik; Seppo Yla-Herttuala; Mervin C Yoder; Arjan W Griffioen Journal: Angiogenesis Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 9.596
Authors: Koen E A van der Bogt; Alwine A Hellingman; Maarten A Lijkwan; Ernst-Jan Bos; Margreet R de Vries; Juliaan R M van Rappard; Michael P Fischbein; Paul H Quax; Robert C Robbins; Jaap F Hamming; Joseph C Wu Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-01
Authors: Maarten A Lijkwan; Alwine A Hellingman; Ernst J Bos; Koen E A van der Bogt; Mei Huang; Nigel G Kooreman; Margreet R de Vries; Hendrika A B Peters; Robert C Robbins; Jaap F Hamming; Paul H A Quax; Joseph C Wu Journal: Hum Gene Ther Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 5.695
Authors: Jeremy W Winkler; Stephania Libreros; Xavier De La Rosa; Brian E Sansbury; Paul C Norris; Nan Chiang; David Fichtner; Gregory S Keyes; Nicholas Wourms; Matthew Spite; Charles N Serhan Journal: J Leukoc Biol Date: 2018-01-29 Impact factor: 4.962
Authors: Joseph M McClung; Timothy J McCord; Kevin Southerland; Cameron A Schmidt; Michael E Padgett; Terence E Ryan; Christopher D Kontos Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Selena Magalotti; Tiffany P Gustafson; Qian Cao; Dana R Abendschein; Richard A Pierce; Mikhail Y Berezin; Walter J Akers Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Robert A Brenes; Caroline C Jadlowiec; Mackenzie Bear; Peter Hashim; Clinton D Protack; Xin Li; Wei Lv; Michael J Collins; Alan Dardik Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 4.268