3.8 Article

New canine spinal cord injury model free from laminectomy

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH PROTOCOLS
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages 171-180

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainresprot.2005.01.001

Keywords

spinal cord injury (SCI); intervertebral foramen; magnetic resonance (MR) imaging; magnetic stimulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present report details the successful development of a model for spinal cord injury (SCI). This model is simple, reproducible, and requires no laminectomy. Development of the model was carried out using fourteen dogs. A balloon catheter was inserted into the extradural space via the intervertebral foramen of each dog, then the balloon was inflated at the L1 level by injection of saline. Six dogs underwent compression with a balloon volume of 1.5 ml, three dogs with a volume of 1.0 ml, and the remaining five dogs were used as uninjured controls. We applied the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) locomotor rating scale to the dogs. Compression of the spinal cord for 10 min at 1.5 ml produced severe paraplegia (BBB remained zero or one for 6 months following surgery), while compression for the same time interval at 1.0 ml produced moderate paraplegia. Electrophysiological tests showed no hindlimb movement upon stimulation cranial to the site of injury in the 1.5-ml group. The volume of abnormal-intensity lesions in the 1.0-ml group calculated using MR imaging showed no marked changes in either high- or low-intensity lesions after 3 months, whereas in the 1.5-ml group, the low-intensity lesions alone showed a marked increase. Pathological examination of the damaged spinal cord showed the formation of cavities surrounded by sear tissue containing high levels of collagen. These findings closely resembled those of clinical cases. It was concluded that 10 min of balloon compression with a volume of 1.5 ml caused irreversible paraplegia in dogs. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available