两种常用压力性损伤大鼠模型的建立方法与效果评价
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.河北医科大学研究生院;2.河北省疾病预防控制中心;3.北京大学人民医院;4.河北省人民医院;5.沧州市中心医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:

河北省卫生健康委员会2020年政府资助临床医学人才培养项目,编号:冀卫办科教[2021]1号;


Establishment method and effect evaluation of two common pressure uler rat models
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Graduate School of Hebei Medical University;2.Hebei Center for Disease Control and Prevention;3.Peking University People's Hospital;4.Hebei General Hospital;5.Cangzhou Central Hospital

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的:通过比较两种不同的压力性损伤大鼠模型的建立方法,探索更合适的压力性损伤动物模型制备方法。方法:将18只雄性SD大鼠随机分为对照组(n=6),模型A组(n=6)和模型B组(n=6)。对照组:对模拟造模部位脱毛后进行碘伏处理。模型A组:采用单纯深部组织异物植入法进行纵向加压;模型B组:使用磁铁加压法进行横向加压,记录制备各组大鼠产生压力性损伤模型的全程时间及各分期时间,观察大鼠的一般情况,并进行成模率、死亡率、感染率的比较。 结果:肉眼观察到模型A组和模型B组均逐渐出现受压部位红肿、溃烂,出现渗血、渗液并伴有坏死现象。模型A组与模型B组产生压力性损伤全程时间比较:两组之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。模型A组与模型B组产生压力性损伤各期时间比较:I期两组之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);II期两组之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);Ⅲ期两组之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);Ⅳ期两组之间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。对照组大鼠精神、运动评分与模型A组、模型B组比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。模型A组大鼠与模型B组大鼠一般状态有明显区别,均出现毛色黯淡,活跃度下降的现象。模型A组大鼠与模型B组成模率为100%。模型A组死亡率、感染率高于模型B组,分别为33.34%、16.70%。 结论:两种方式均可成功制备压力性损伤四期模型,二者既有共性也有各自特点,磁铁加压法用时短,大鼠一般状态良好,死亡率和感染率低,适合短时间内干预性研究;单纯深部组织异物植入法用时长,需要大鼠有一定耐受性,感染率高,死亡率高,可运用于长期的观察类压力性损伤大鼠的研究。

    Abstract:

    Objective : By comparing two different methods of establishing rat models of pressure uler, to explore a more suitable method for preparing animal models of pressure uler. Methods : 18 male SD rats were randomly divided into control group ( n = 6 ), model group A ( n = 6 ) and model group B ( n = 6 ). Control group : iodophor treatment was performed after hair removal at the simulated modeling site. Model A group : longitudinal compression was performed by simple deep tissue foreign body implantation ; model group B : transverse compression was performed by magnet compression method. The whole process time and each stage time of pressure uler model in each group were recorded. The general condition of rats was observed, and the molding rate, mortality rate and infection rate were compared. Results : The naked eye observed that the model A group and the model B group gradually appeared redness and swelling, ulceration, bleeding, exudation and necrosis. Comparison of the whole time of pressure uler in model group A and model group B : the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P0.05 ) ; the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.05 ). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.05 ). There was significant difference between the two groups in stage IV ( P < 0.05 ). The mental and motor scores of the rats in the control group were significantly different from those in the model group A and the model group B ( P < 0.05 ). The general state of rats in model group A and model group B was significantly different, and the coat color was dim and the activity decreased. The model rate of rats in model A and model B was 100 %. The mortality and infection rate of model A group were higher than those of model B group, which were 33.34 % and 16.70 % respectively. Conclusion : Both methods can successfully prepare a four-stage model of pressure uler. The two methods have both commonalities and their own characteristics. The magnet compression method takes a short time, the rats are generally in good condition, and the mortality and infection rate are low. It is suitable for short-term intervention research ; the simple deep tissue foreign body implantation method takes a long time, requires rats to have a certain tolerance, has a high infection rate and a high mortality rate, and can be used in long-term observation of pressure uler rats.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2023-05-30
  • 最后修改日期:2023-07-20
  • 录用日期:2023-12-01
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期:
自2024年1期开始,杂志参考文献改为中英文对照,具体格式要求可置下载中心查看!
关闭