4.5 Article

A mouse model of retinal hypoperfusion injury induced by unilateral common carotid artery occlusion

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL EYE RESEARCH
卷 201, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2020.108275

关键词

Carotid artery occlusion; Hypoxia; Ischemia; Model; Retina

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIT) [NRF-2019R1C1C1007610, NRF-2018R1C1B5085922]
  2. Creative-Pioneering Researchers Program through Seoul National University (SNU)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Retina, one of the highest oxygen demanding tissues, is vulnerable to vascular insufficiencies, and various ocular vascular disorders can cause chronic retinal ischemia. To investigate the pathophysiology, rodent models developed by bilateral common carotid artery occlusion (BCCAO) have been utilized. However, mice lack posterior communicating arteries in the circle of Willis and cannot endure the brain ischemia induced by the bilateral occlusion. A mouse model to better reflect the localized ischemic stress in the retina without affecting the brain is still needed. Here, we established a mouse model of ischemic injury by permanent unilateral common carotid artery occlusion (UCCAO). Adult male mice were subjected to UCCAO, and changes in the ipsilateral retina were examined in comparison with the contralateral retina. Delayed perfusion was observed in the ipsilateral retina right after the occlusion and was not recovered later on. Common features of retinal ischemia were observed: hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) stabilization; upregulation of hypoxia-responsive genes; altered levels of cytokines and chemokines. Activation of astrocytes and Muller cells in the inner retina was detected at day 2, and thinning of the inner retinal layer became significant at week 10. Together, our model can simulate retinal ischemia with morphological and molecular changes. It can be utilized to investigate pathophysiology of ischemic retinopathies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据