| Literature DB >> 23116234 |
Zion Zibly1, Cody D Schlaff, Ira Gordon, Jeeva Munasinghe, Kevin A Camphausen.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal cord metastatic lesions affect a high number of cancer patients usually resulting in spinal cord compression syndrome. A major obstacle in the research of spinal metastatic disease is the lack of a simple reproducible animal model that mimics the natural course of the disease. In this study, we present a highly reproducible rodent model that can be used for different types of cancers while mimicking the natural course of human metastatic spinal cord compression syndrome.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23116234 PMCID: PMC3506549 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-13-137
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurosci ISSN: 1471-2202 Impact factor: 3.288
Figure 1The median BBB score of treatment group over time from date of surgery until MR imaging. Cut-off value was a BBB score of 3.
Figure 2T1 weighted post contrast MRI showing the destruction of the inner cortex of the laminae and cord compression by the tumor (red arrow in both frames). (A) Higher magnification of the spinal cord and invading tumor compressing the cord (B) Gross anatomical section of rat spinal cord showing tumor invasion and destruction of the vertebra as well as spinal cord compression (outlined box). (C) Histological cross-section of rat vertebra exhibiting tumor infiltration (T; stained purple) into the spinal canal and vertebra (pink) (D).
Figure 3Animal positioning and preparation prior to surgical procedure. The thoraco-lumbar back is shaved, prepared and the mid-line skin above the spinal process is marked.
Figure 4Skin incision above the spinal process and exposing the lamina of the vertebra bilateral. (A) Preparing the lamina for tumor transplant, drilling of the right lamina outer cortex after resection of the spinous process. (B).
Figure 5Artist rendering of surgical procedure. (A) Drilling of the outer cortex of the lamina. (B) Implantation of the tumor cells and covering by bone wax. (C) Tumor growth and spinal cord pressure.
Modified Basso-Beattie-Bresnahan rating scale
| No ankle movement | |
| Slight ankle movement | |
| Extensive ankle movements | |
| Plantar placing of the paw with or without weight support -OR- | |
| | Occasional, frequent or consistent dorsal stepping but no plantar stepping |
| Occasional plantar stepping | |
| Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, no coordination -OR- Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, some coordination, paws rotated at initial contact and lift off | |
| Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, some coordination, paws parallel at initial contact -OR- Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws rotated at initial contact and lift off | |
| Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws parallel at initial contact and rotated at lift off –OR- Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws parallel at initial contact and lift off , and severe trunk instability | |
| Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws parallel at initial contact and lift off , and mild trunk instability –OR- Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws parallel at initial contact and lift off, and normal trunk stability and tail down or up & down | |
| Frequent or consistent plantar stepping, mostly coordinated, paws parallel at initial contact and lift off , and normal trunk stability and tail always up |