| Literature DB >> 22761610 |
Li Li1, Zongqiang Hu, Wen Li, Mingdao Hu, Jianghua Ran, Peng Chen, Qiangming Sun.
Abstract
Objective. To establish a standardized animal model for liver fibrosis with the same assessment criteria for liver fibrosis studies that have been established on a unified platform. Methods. The standardized liver fibrosis model was established using Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats that either received an intraperitoneal injection of carbon tetrachloride (CCl(4)) in small dosages or ingested an ethanol solution. Results. The definite corresponding rules among modeling of different weeks and corresponding serology indices as well as different pathological staging can be observed by modeling with small dosages and slow, individualized, and combined administrations. Conclusion. This method can be used for the standardized establishment of a liver fibrosis model in rats across 5 pathological stages, ranging from S0 to S4, with a high success rate (89.33%) and low death rate (17.3%) because of the application of multiple hypotoxic chemicals for modeling. We refer to the criteria of Histological Grading and Staging of Chronic Hepatitis for Fibrosis established by the 10th World Digestive Disease Academic Conference in Los Angeles in September 1994 (revised in November 2000).Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22761610 PMCID: PMC3384940 DOI: 10.1155/2012/560345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract ISSN: 1687-6121 Impact factor: 2.260
Figure 1Comparison of weight changes of rats between the groups in each week.
Results of related indices in different stages (mean ± SD).
| Stages of hepatic fibrosis |
| HA | LN | PIIIP | CIV | CTGF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S0 | 10 | 66.59 ± 6.89 | 107.81 ± 12.04 | 86.75 ± 19.26 | 58.54 ± 14.12 | 0.20 ± 0.13 |
| S1 | 11 | 106.29 ± 19.49 | 110.60 ± 14.43 | 105.68 ± 20.03 | 66.95 ± 17.06 | 0.41 ± 0.10 |
| S2 | 22 | 164.46 ± 37.09 | 117.24 ± 19.86 | 114.04 ± 19.24 | 90.99 ± 27.15 | 0.59 ± 0.07 |
| S3 | 11 | 251.66 ± 74.75 | 139.95 ± 25.78 | 156.96 ± 27.18 | 103.79 ± 25.41 | 0.76 ± 0.09 |
| S4 | 13 | 342.54 ± 80.72 | 132.26 ± 23.94 | 170.28 ± 17.91 | 137.83 ± 41.56 | 0.99 ± 0.03 |
| F | 54.52 | 5.431 | 34.753 | 15.320 | 149.680 | |
| P | 0.000∗ | 0.001∗ | 0.000∗ | 0.000∗ | 0.000∗ |
No te s. ∗denotes P < 0.002, and the difference showed statistical significance.
Pairwise comparison. HA: pairwise comparison between S0 and S1 stage showed no significant difference, whereas pair comparisons of other stages showed a significant difference. LN: pairwise comparison between S0 and S1 stage, S0 and S2 stage, and S3 and S4 stage showed no significant difference, whereas pair comparisons of other stages showed statistical significance. PIIIP: pairwise comparison between S1 and S2 stage and S3 and S4 stage showed no significant difference, whereas pair comparisons of other stages showed statistical significance. CIV: pairwise comparison between S0 and S1 stage and S2 and S3 stage showed no significant difference, whereas pair comparisons of other stages showed statistical significance. CTGF: the comparison between different liver fibrosis stages showed statistical significance.
Figure 2The pathological stage of the 2nd–4th week is S1. The figure describes the general appearance of liver pathology: the liver was slightly swollen, the color was slightly gloomy, and the texture was normal. Under the microscope, the hepatic lobular architecture was integrated, the structure of chloasma hepaticum was not clear, the hepatocytes showed vacuolar degeneration, the structure of the portal area was still clear, and no fibrous hyperplasia was observed. HE. Bar 5200 mm.
Figure 5The pathological stage of the 13th–14th week is S4. The figure was the general appearance of liver pathology under the microscope: fibroblasts in the portal area showed evident hyperplasia, the fibrous septum was widened, the grid division was formed in liver cells, the pseudo-lobule of the liver was formed, and a typical liver fibrosis was formed, which indicated it was at the stage of hepatic cirrhosis. HE. Bar 5200 mm.