Matthew O Fraser1,2, Phillip P Smith3, Maryrose P Sullivan4,5, Dale E Bjorling6, Lysanne Campeau7, Karl-Erik Andersson8,9, Mitsuharu Yoshiyama10. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 2. Department of Research and Development, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Connecticut Medical Center, Farmington, Connecticut. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Research and Development, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Surgical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin. 7. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 8. Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston Salem, North Carolina. 9. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 10. Department of Urology, University of Yamanashi Graduate School of Medicine, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Abstract
AIMS: Rodent cystometry has provided valuable insights into the impact of the disease, injury, and aging on the cellular and molecular pathways, neurologic processes, and biomechanics of lower urinary tract function. The purpose of this white paper is to highlight the benefits and shortcomings of different experimental methods and strategies and to provide guidance on the proper interpretation of results. METHODS: Literature search, selection of articles, and conclusions based on discussions among a panel of workers in the field. RESULTS: A range of cystometric tests and techniques used to explore biological phenomena relevant to the lower urinary tract are described, the advantages and disadvantages of various experimental conditions are discussed, and guidance on the practical aspects of experimental execution and proper interpretation of results are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Cystometric evaluation of rodents comprises an extensive collection of functional tests that can be performed under a variety of experimental conditions. Decisions regarding which approaches to choose should be determined by the specific questions to be addressed and implementation of the test should follow standardized procedures.
AIMS: Rodent cystometry has provided valuable insights into the impact of the disease, injury, and aging on the cellular and molecular pathways, neurologic processes, and biomechanics of lower urinary tract function. The purpose of this white paper is to highlight the benefits and shortcomings of different experimental methods and strategies and to provide guidance on the proper interpretation of results. METHODS: Literature search, selection of articles, and conclusions based on discussions among a panel of workers in the field. RESULTS: A range of cystometric tests and techniques used to explore biological phenomena relevant to the lower urinary tract are described, the advantages and disadvantages of various experimental conditions are discussed, and guidance on the practical aspects of experimental execution and proper interpretation of results are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Cystometric evaluation of rodents comprises an extensive collection of functional tests that can be performed under a variety of experimental conditions. Decisions regarding which approaches to choose should be determined by the specific questions to be addressed and implementation of the test should follow standardized procedures.
Authors: Kyle A Wegner; Hannah Ruetten; Nicholas M Girardi; Chelsea A O'Driscoll; Jaskiran K Sandhu; Anne E Turco; Lisa L Abler; Peiqing Wang; Zunyi Wang; Dale E Bjorling; Rita Malinowski; Richard E Peterson; Douglas W Strand; Paul C Marker; Chad M Vezina Journal: Am J Clin Exp Urol Date: 2021-02-15
Authors: Hannah Ruetten; Jaskiran Sandhu; Brett Mueller; Peiqing Wang; Helen L Zhang; Kyle A Wegner; Mark Cadena; Simran Sandhu; Lisa L Abler; Jonathan Zhu; Chelsea A O'Driscoll; Britta Chelgren; Zunyi Wang; Tian Shen; Jonathan Barasch; Dale E Bjorling; Chad M Vezina Journal: Am J Physiol Renal Physiol Date: 2020-11-02
Authors: Robert F Hoey; Daniel Medina-Aguiñaga; Fahmi Khalifa; Beatrice Ugiliweneza; Sharon Zdunowski; Jason Fell; Ahmed Naglah; Ayman S El-Baz; April N Herrity; Susan J Harkema; Charles H Hubscher Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Daniel Medina-Aguinaga; Robert F Hoey; Alvaro Munoz; Moises Altamira-Camacho; Jose L Quintanar; Charles H Hubscher Journal: Physiol Rep Date: 2021-01
Authors: Kristine Janssen; Kangli Deng; Steve J A Majerus; Dan Li Lin; Brett Hanzlicek; Robert S Butler; Carl H van der Vaart; Margot S Damaser Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Jan Franken; Helene De Bruyn; Roma Rietjens; Andrei Segal; Dirk De Ridder; Wouter Everaerts; Thomas Voets; Greetje Vande Velde Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 14.136