Development and Characterization of a Novel Bipedal Standing Mouse Model of Intervertebral Disc and Facet Joint Degeneration
Development and Characterization of a Novel Bipedal Standing Mouse Model of Intervertebral Disc and Facet Joint Degeneration
复制标题
新型双足站立小鼠椎间盘和小关节退变模型的开发和表征
DOI：
10.1097/corr.0000000000000712
复制
发表时间：
2019-06-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Huang, Minjun
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ao, Xiang;Wang, Liang;Huang, Minjun
背景：腰椎间盘退变是慢性下腰痛的主要原因，而过多的负荷会导致腰椎间盘退变。为了评价新型双足站立小鼠腰椎间盘退变模型的实用性，我们询问：(1)与对照组相比，双足小鼠腰椎高度、组织学特征和免疫组织化学指标是否发生了退行性改变？(2)双足小鼠在模拟应激增加引起的脊柱退变方面与老龄小鼠相似吗？方法将32只8周龄雄性C57BL/6小鼠分为实验组和对照组。根据小鼠的恐水症状，实验组小鼠被放置在一个有限的含水空间(5 mm深)，从而被诱导主动采取两足站立姿势。这项研究每天进行两次，一周7天，每天6小时。对照组老鼠同样被放在一个有限但没有水的空间里。视频监控被用来计算两组小鼠两足站立的时间百分比。实验组双脚站立时间百分比高于对照组(48%+/-5%，95%可信区间，42%-54%对95%+/-1%，95%可信区间，92%-97%；P
Background Intervertebral disc degeneration is a major cause of chronic low back pain, and excessive loading contributes to intervertebral disc degeneration. However, the lack of an effective bipedal in vivo animal model limits research about this condition.Questions/purposes To evaluate the utility of a new type of bipedal standing mouse model for intervertebral disc degeneration, we asked: (1) Are there spinal degeneration changes in bipedal mice as determined by lumbar disc height, histologic features, and immunohistochemistry measures compared with control mice? (2) Are the bipedal mice comparable to aged mice for simulating the spinal degeneration caused by increased stress?Methods Thirty-two 8-week-old male C57BL/6 mice were divided into experimental and control groups. Based on their hydrophobia, mice in the experimental group were placed in a limited water-containing space (5 mm deep) and were thereby induced to actively take a bipedal standing posture. This was conducted twice a day for a total of 6 hours a day, 7 days a week. Control mice were similarly placed in a limited but water-free space. Video surveillance was used to calculate the percentage of time spent in the bipedal stance for the two groups of mice. Compared with the control group, the percentage of time standing on both feet in the experimental group was higher (48% +/- 5%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 42%-54% versus 95%+/- 1%, 95% CI, 92%-97%; p