Literature DB >> 34308594

[Comparison of two methods for preparing knee osteochondral injury models in mice].

Huan Liu1,2, Qirui Ding1, Cheng Ma1, Haonan Qin1, Yifan Wei1, Yongxin Ren1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To observe the effect of using tungsten drills to prepare mouse knee osteochondral injury model by comparing with the needle modeling method, in order to provide an appropriate animal modeling method for osteochondral injury research.
METHODS: A total of 75 two-month-old male C57BL/6 mice were randomly divided into 3 groups ( n=25). Mice in groups A and B were used to prepare the right knee osteochondral injury models by using needles and tungsten drills, respectively; group C was sham-operation group. The general condition of the mice was observed after operation. The samples were taken at 1 day and 1, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after modeling, and HE staining was performed. The depth, width, and cross-sectional area of the injury site at 1 day in groups A and B were measured, and the percentage of the injury depth to the thickness of the articular cartilage (depth/thickness) was calculated. Toluidine blue staining and immunohistochemical staining for collagen type Ⅱ were performed at 8 weeks, and the International Cartilage Research Society (ICRS) score was used to evaluate the osteochondral healing in groups A and B.
RESULTS: All mice survived to the completion of the experiment. HE staining showed that group C had normal cartilage morphology. At 1 day after modeling, the injury in group A only broke through the cartilage layer and reached the subchondral bone without entering the bone marrow cavity; the injury in group B reached the bone marrow cavity. The depth, width, cross-sectional area, and depth/thickness of the injury in group A were significantly lower than those in group B ( P<0.05). At 1, 2, 4, and 8 weeks after modeling, there was no obvious tissue filling in the injured part of group A, and no toluidine blue staining and expression of collagen type Ⅱ were observed at 8 weeks; while the injured part of group B was gradually filled with tissue, the toluidine blue staining and the expression of collagen type Ⅱ were seen at 8 weeks. At 8 weeks, the ICRS score of group A was 8.2±1.3, which was lower than that of group B (13.6±0.9), showing significant difference ( t=-7.637, P=0.000).
CONCLUSION: The tungsten drills can break through the subchondral bone layer and enter the bone marrow cavity, and the injury can heal spontaneously. Compared with the needle modeling method, it is a better method for modeling knee osteochondral injury in mice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Osteochondral injury; animal model; mouse; tungsten drill

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34308594      PMCID: PMC8311214          DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.202101098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi        ISSN: 1002-1892


  14 in total

Review 1.  Large Animal Models for Osteochondral Regeneration.

Authors:  Isabel R Dias; Carlos A Viegas; Pedro P Carvalho
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 2.622

2.  An Articular Cartilage Repair Model in Common C57Bl/6 Mice.

Authors:  Masatake Matsuoka; Tomohiro Onodera; Fumio Sasazawa; Daisuke Momma; Rikiya Baba; Kazutoshi Hontani; Norimasa Iwasaki
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 3.056

Review 3.  Animal models for cartilage regeneration and repair.

Authors:  Constance R Chu; Michal Szczodry; Stephen Bruno
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.389

4.  Small subchondral drill holes improve marrow stimulation of articular cartilage defects.

Authors:  Mona Eldracher; Patrick Orth; Magali Cucchiarini; Dietrich Pape; Henning Madry
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 6.202

Review 5.  Stem Cell Treatment for Knee Articular Cartilage Defects and Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Armin Arshi; Frank A Petrigliano; Riley J Williams; Kristofer J Jones
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2020-02

6.  Interspecies comparison of subchondral bone properties important for cartilage repair.

Authors:  Anik Chevrier; Ahou S M Kouao; Genevieve Picard; Mark B Hurtig; Michael D Buschmann
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2014-09-19       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 7.  Basic Science of Articular Cartilage.

Authors:  Camila B Carballo; Yusuke Nakagawa; Ichiro Sekiya; Scott A Rodeo
Journal:  Clin Sports Med       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 2.182

8.  Tumor Formation of Adult Stem Cell Transplants in Rodent Arthritic Joints.

Authors:  Fanny Chapelin; Aman Khurana; Mohammad Moneeb; Florette K Gray Hazard; Chun Fai Ray Chan; Hossein Nejadnik; Dita Gratzinger; Solomon Messing; Jason Erdmann; Amitabh Gaur; Heike E Daldrup-Link
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.488

9.  p16(INK4A) represses the paracrine tumor-promoting effects of breast stromal fibroblasts.

Authors:  M M Al-Ansari; S F Hendrayani; A I Shehata; A Aboussekhra
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 9.867

10.  A novel in vivo murine model of cartilage regeneration. Age and strain-dependent outcome after joint surface injury.

Authors:  N M Eltawil; C De Bari; P Achan; C Pitzalis; F Dell'accio
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 6.576

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.