| Literature DB >> 29707583 |
Francesco Faita1, Nicole Di Lascio1,2, Chiara Rossi3, Claudia Kusmic1, Anna Solini4.
Abstract
The availability of an animal model able to reliably mirror organ damage occurring in metabolic diseases is an urgent need. These models, mostly rodents, have not been fully characterized in terms of cardiovascular, renal, and hepatic ultrasound parameters, and only sparse values can be found in literature. Aim of this paper is to provide a detailed, noninvasive description of the heart, vessels, liver, and kidneys of the db/db mouse by ultrasound imaging. Sixteen wild type and thirty-four db/db male mice (11-week-old) were studied. State-of-the-art ultrasound technology was used to acquire images of cardiovascular, renal, and hepatic districts. A set of parameters describing function of the selected organs was evaluated. db/db mice are characterized by systolic and diastolic dysfunction, confirmed by strain analysis. Abdominal aortic and carotid stiffness do not seem to be increased in diabetic rodents; furthermore, they are characterized by a smaller mean diameter for both vessels. Renal microcirculation is significantly compromised, while liver steatosis is only slightly higher in db/db mice than in controls. We offer here for the first time an in vivo detailed ultrasonographic characterization of the db/db mouse, providing a useful tool for a thoughtful choice of the right rodent model for any experimental design.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29707583 PMCID: PMC5863337 DOI: 10.1155/2018/4561309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Res Impact factor: 4.011
Figure 1Cardiac ultrasound scan. (a) Parasternal long axis view of the left ventricle. (b) Parasternal short axis view of the left ventricle. (c) Analysis of the longitudinal and radial strain/strain rate. (d) Analysis of the circumferential and radial strain/strain rate. (e) Parasternal 4-chamber view with PW-Doppler for the evaluation of E/A parameter.
Figure 2Abdominal aorta ultrasound scan. (a) B-mode image sequence was used to derived diameter and distension. (b) PW-Doppler signal was used to plot diameter-flow velocity loop thus evaluating PWVabd. Aortic pulse pressure was derived from PWVabd and distension measurements. Furthermore, blood flow velocity signal was used to derive wall shear rate measurements. Carotid artery ultrasound scan. (c) B-mode image sequence was used to derived diameter and distension. (d) PW-Doppler signal was used to plot diameter-flow velocity loop thus evaluating PWVcar. Furthermore, blood flow velocity signal was used to derive wall shear rate measurements.
Figure 3Kidney and liver ultrasound scan. (a) Power Doppler image was used to localize renal vessels, while PW-Doppler signal was used to measure renal blood flow thus deriving pulsatility and reflectivity indexes. (b) Mean gray levels of the liver parenchyma were compared to mean gray levels of the renal parenchyma.
Weight and biochemical and physiological parameters in the two groups of mice.
| wt |
| |
|---|---|---|
| Weight (g) | 30 [2] | 46 [5]∗ |
| Blood glucose (mg/dl) | 160 [31] | 536 [73]∗ |
| Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 166 [47] | 201 [81] |
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 134 [38] | 177 [45]∗ |
| AST (IU/l) | 53 [14] | 96 [32]∗ |
| HR# (bpm) | 378 [77] | 296 [77]∗ |
| RR# (bpm) | 117 [19] | 134 [53] ∗ |
Data are presented as median [IQR]. ∗p < 0.05 versus wt. #Data were obtained under anesthesia
Ultrasonographic cardiac parameters in the two groups of mice.
| wt |
| |
|---|---|---|
| LVmass (mg) | 91 [13] | 77 [17]∗ |
| CO (ml/min) | 13.49 [6.63] | 7.01 [3.53]∗ |
| SV ( | 38.88 [17.37] | 22.82 [8.73]∗ |
| FS (%) | 14.80 [6.50] | 9.24 [6.04]∗ |
| EF (%) | 53.50 [9.35] | 44.24 [10.56]∗ |
| E/A | 1.37 [0.37] | 2.00 [0.75]∗ |
| gLS (%) | −14.39 [5.76] | −14.49 [4.36] |
| gLSR (1/s) | −4.54 [1.51] | −4.75 [3.35] |
| gRS (%) | 39.74 [11.81] | 32.22 [14.75]∗ |
| gRSR (1/s) | 9.39 [3.17] | 7.88 [3.31]∗ |
| gCS (%) | −23.63 [5.99] | −24.96 [5.61] |
| gCSR (1/s) | −8.18 [2.09] | −8.75 [2.75] |
Data are presented as median [IQR]. ∗p < 0.05 versus wt. LVmass: left ventricular mass; CO: cardiac output; SV: stroke volume; FS: fractional shortening; EF: ejection fraction; E/A: E/A ratio; gLS/gLSR: global longitudinal strain/strain rate; gRS/gRSR: global radial strain/strain rate; gCS/gCSR: global circumferential strain/strain rate.
Ultrasonographic vascular parameters in the two groups of mice.
| wt |
| |
|---|---|---|
| Dmabd (mm) | 1.09 [0.12] | 0.98 [0.11]∗ |
| relDabd (%) | 20.77 [2.88] | 17.39 [3.74]∗ |
| PWVabd (m/s) | 1.80 [0.33] | 1.90 [0.90] |
| Dmcar (mm) | 0.45 [0.08] | 0.42 [0.08] |
| relDcar (%) | 23.29 [5.37] | 19.20 [7.41]∗ |
| PWVcar (m/s) | 1.43 [0.57] | 1.44 [0.53] |
| PPao (mmHg) | 10.56 [4.57] | 10.04 [9.08] |
| WSRabd (1/s) | 1039.00 [450.36] | 929.09 [276.38]∗ |
| WSRcar (1/s) | 1630.56 [730.30] | 991.82 [531.02]∗ |
Data are presented as median [IQR]. ∗p < 0.05 versus wt. Dmabd: abdominal aorta mean diameter; relDabd: abdominal aorta relative distension; PWVabd: abdominal aorta pulse wave velocity; Dmcar: carotid artery mean diameter; relDcar: carotid artery relative distension; PWVcar: carotid artery pulse wave velocity; PPao: aortic pulse pressure; WSRabd: abdominal wall shear rate; WSRcar: carotid wall shear rate.
Ultrasonographic hepatic and renal parameters in the two groups of mice.
| wt |
| |
|---|---|---|
| RI | 0.64 [0.12] | 0.73 [0.12]∗ |
| PI | 1.02 [0.23] | 1.23 [0.31]∗ |
|
| 0.79 [0.34] | 0.95 [0.29] |
Data are presented as median [IQR]. ∗p < 0.05 versus wt. RI: renal resistivity index; PI: renal pulsatility index; steatoscore: surrogate index of steatosis degree.