Why the study?
Does permanent ischemia compared to transient ischemia provide a better model for investigating cell therapy in NOD/Scid mice?
Does permanent ischemia compared to transient ischemia provide a better model for investigating cell therapy in NOD/Scid mice?
Permanent ischemia is a superior model to ischemia-reperfusion in NOD/Scid mice for cell therapy research because it induces sufficient damage to provide a measurable therapeutic window.
Transient ischemia models may better reflect clinical MI; leaves open optimal choice for translational studies in immunodeficient mice.
Myocardial infarction animal studies are used to study disease mechanisms and new treatment options. Typically, myocardial infarction (MI) is induced by permanent occlusion of the left anterior descending artery. Since in MI patients coronary blood flow is often restored new experimental models better reflecting clinical practice are needed. Here, permanent ischemia MI (PI group) was compared with transient ischemia (45 min) (IR group) in immunodeficient NOD/Scid mice. Cardiac function, infarct size, wall thickness and total collagen deposition were significantly reduced only in PI mice. Cardiac inflammatory cells and serum cytokine levels were less dynamic in IR animals compared to PI. So although IR better reflects clinical practice, it is secondary to PI for investigating cell therapy, since it induces too little damage to provide a measurable therapeutic window. MI did result in significant changes in the inflammatory state, indicating this immunodeficient mouse strain is valuable to study human cell therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zuylen et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: