4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Lung injury and recovery in a murine model of unilateral acid aspiration: Functional, biochemical, and morphologic characterization

Journal

ANESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 108, Issue 6, Pages 1037-1046

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318173f64f

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Acid aspiration is a complication of general anesthesia. Most animal models developed to define its pathophysiology have focused on the acute (:524 h) phase of the injury. The authors describe a model of acid aspiration allowing the study of this type of lung injury over time. Methods: The authors instilled hydrochloric acid (0.1 m, 1.5 ml/kg) or normal saline in the right bronchus of mice. Lung injury was evaluated at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 2 weeks by assessing arterial blood gases, respiratory system compliance, lung wet weight normalized by body weight, lung myeloperoxidase activity, and histology. Twelve hours and 2 weeks after injury, a computed tomography scan was obtained. Results: In the hydrochloric acid group, arterial oxygen tension decreased (P < 0.05) at 12 and 24 h, whereas it recovered at 2 weeks; respiratory system compliance was lower both at 24 h and 2 weeks (P < 0.05). Lung weight increased at 12 and 24 h (P < 0.05). Myeloperoxidase activity peaked between 6 and 12 h. Computed tomography at 12 h showed that almost 30% of the injured lung was abnormally aerated. Although reduced, the abnormalities were still present at 2 weeks as confirmed by a fibrotic scar well evident at histologic examination. Conclusion: The authors characterized a murine model of regional acid aspiration allowing long-term survival. Despite a partial recovery, at 2 weeks the injury persisted, with evidence of fibrosis and lung compliance reduction. This long-term, low-mortality model seems suitable for assessment of the effects of different therapies on lung injury and repair.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available