4.6 Article

Development of a novel mouse constipation model

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 22, 期 9, 页码 2799-2810

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i9.2799

关键词

Cold water; Mouse model; Constipation; ENS

资金

  1. National Key Basic Research Program 973 Program [2011CB505206]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81202744, 81373749]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To establish a novel mouse constipation model. METHODS: Animals were randomly divided into three groups, and intragastrically administered 0-4 degrees C saline (ice-cold group) or 15-20 degrees C saline (saline control group) daily for 14 d, or were left untreated (blank control group). Stools were collected 3-24 h after treatment to record the wet and dry weights and the stool form. Intestinal propulsion experiments were carried out and defecation time was measured for six days continuously after suspending treatments. The expressions of PGP9.5 were detected by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Based on the percentage of stool weight changes compared with baseline (before irritation) in 9-14 d, stool weight changes were classified into three levels. Each level shows a different body state, which is state I (no change: plus or minus 5%), state. (slightly decreased: 5%-15%) and state III (decreased: 15%-25%). In state III, between day 9-14, the stool weights decreased by 15%-25% compared with the baseline, and changed at a rate > 10% compared with blank control values, and the stools became small and dry. Additionally, intestinal functions degenerated in these animals, and PGP9.5-positive expression markedly decreased in jejunum, ileum and proximal colon myenteric plexus. CONCLUSION: Irritation with ice-cold saline is a stable, repeatable method in building constipation model in mice for exploring the pathogenesis and treatment options of constipation, and the change of stool weight and size may serve as a useful tool to judge a constipation model success or not.

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

4.6
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