STUDY DESIGN: PRISMA-guided systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive framework of the current animal models for investigating spinal cord injury (SCI) and categorize them based on the aims, patterns and levels of injury, and outcome measurements as well as animal species. SETTING: Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. METHODS: An electronic search of the Medline database for literature describing animal models of SCI was performed on 1 January 2016 using the following keywords: 'spinal cord injuries' and 'animal models'. The search retrieved 2870 articles. Reviews and non-original articles were excluded. Data extraction was independently performed by two reviewers. RESULTS: Among the 2209 included studies, testing the effects of drug's or growth factor's interventions was the most common aim (36.6%) followed by surveying pathophysiologic changes (30.2%). The most common spinal region involved was thoracic (81%). Contusion was the most common pattern of injury (41%) followed by transection (32.5%) and compression (19.4%). The most common species involved in animal models of SCI was the rat (72.4%). Two or more types of outcome assessments were used in the majority of the studies, and the most common assessment method was biological plus behavioral (50.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Prior to choosing an animal model, the objectives of the proposed study must precisely be defined. Contusion and compression models better simulate the biomechanics and neuropathology of human injury, whereas transection models are valuable to study anatomic regeneration. Rodents are the most common and probably best-suited species for preliminary SCI studies.
STUDY DESIGN: PRISMA-guided systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive framework of the current animal models for investigating spinal cord injury (SCI) and categorize them based on the aims, patterns and levels of injury, and outcome measurements as well as animal species. SETTING:Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. METHODS: An electronic search of the Medline database for literature describing animal models of SCI was performed on 1 January 2016 using the following keywords: 'spinal cord injuries' and 'animal models'. The search retrieved 2870 articles. Reviews and non-original articles were excluded. Data extraction was independently performed by two reviewers. RESULTS: Among the 2209 included studies, testing the effects of drug's or growth factor's interventions was the most common aim (36.6%) followed by surveying pathophysiologic changes (30.2%). The most common spinal region involved was thoracic (81%). Contusion was the most common pattern of injury (41%) followed by transection (32.5%) and compression (19.4%). The most common species involved in animal models of SCI was the rat (72.4%). Two or more types of outcome assessments were used in the majority of the studies, and the most common assessment method was biological plus behavioral (50.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Prior to choosing an animal model, the objectives of the proposed study must precisely be defined. Contusion and compression models better simulate the biomechanics and neuropathology of human injury, whereas transection models are valuable to study anatomic regeneration. Rodents are the most common and probably best-suited species for preliminary SCI studies.
Authors: Lucia Friedli; Ephron S Rosenzweig; Quentin Barraud; Martin Schubert; Nadia Dominici; Lea Awai; Jessica L Nielson; Pavel Musienko; Yvette Nout-Lomas; Hui Zhong; Sharon Zdunowski; Roland R Roy; Sarah C Strand; Rubia van den Brand; Leif A Havton; Michael S Beattie; Jacqueline C Bresnahan; Erwan Bézard; Jocelyne Bloch; V Reggie Edgerton; Adam R Ferguson; Armin Curt; Mark H Tuszynski; Grégoire Courtine Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-08-26 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Igor Lavrov; Yury P Gerasimenko; Ronaldo M Ichiyama; Gregoire Courtine; Hui Zhong; Roland R Roy; V Reggie Edgerton Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2006-07-05 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Radi Masri; Raimi L Quiton; Jessica M Lucas; Peter D Murray; Scott M Thompson; Asaf Keller Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2009-04-29 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: T Cheriyan; D J Ryan; J H Weinreb; J Cheriyan; J C Paul; V Lafage; T Kirsch; T J Errico Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Nathaniel R Bridges; Michael Meyers; Jonathan Garcia; Patricia A Shewokis; Karen A Moxon Journal: J Neurosci Methods Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 2.390
Authors: N Zareen; M Shinozaki; D Ryan; H Alexander; A Amer; D Q Truong; N Khadka; A Sarkar; S Naeem; M Bikson; J H Martin Journal: Exp Neurol Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 5.330
Authors: J Walker Wiggins; Natalie Kozyrev; Jonathan E Sledd; George G Wilson; Lique M Coolen Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2019-07-10 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Anil B Shrirao; Frank H Kung; Anton Omelchenko; Rene S Schloss; Nada N Boustany; Jeffrey D Zahn; Martin L Yarmush; Bonnie L Firestein Journal: Biotechnol Bioeng Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Peter Wayne New; Sara J T Guilcher; Susan B Jaglal; Fin Biering-Sørensen; Vanessa K Noonan; Chester Ho Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2017
Authors: Joshua F Yarrow; Hui Jean Kok; Ean G Phillips; Christine F Conover; Jimmy Lee; Taylor E Bassett; Kinley H Buckley; Michael C Reynolds; Russell D Wnek; Dana M Otzel; Cong Chen; Jessica M Jiron; Zachary A Graham; Christopher Cardozo; Krista Vandenborne; Prodip K Bose; Jose Ignacio Aguirre; Stephen E Borst; Fan Ye Journal: J Neurosci Res Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 4.164