Cargando…

Anatomical study: comparing the human, sheep and pig knee meniscus

BACKGROUND: Animal models are commonly used in investigating new treatment options for knee joint injuries including injuries to the meniscus. The reliability and applicability of these models to replicate findings in humans depends on determining the most suitable animal proxy. Therefore, this stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Takroni, Talal, Laouar, Leila, Adesida, Adetola, Elliott, Janet A. W., Jomha, Nadr M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5143332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27928740
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40634-016-0071-3
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Animal models are commonly used in investigating new treatment options for knee joint injuries including injuries to the meniscus. The reliability and applicability of these models to replicate findings in humans depends on determining the most suitable animal proxy. Therefore, this study was designed to compare the wet weight, volume and dimensions of the human meniscus with two commonly used animal models: sheep and pig. METHODS: Human menisci (n = 6 pairs) were obtained from the knee joints of cadaveric male donors. Sheep menisci (n = 6 pairs) and pig menisci (n = 22 pairs) were obtained from the stifle joints of adult sheep and pigs. Meniscal wet weight, volume and dimensions of the body were measured and compared among the species. Anatomical dimensions included circumference, width, peripheral height, articular height and superior articular length. RESULTS: The circumference of human menisci (lateral: 84.0 mm, medial: 88.7 mm) was significantly longer than that of sheep (lateral: 50.0 mm, medial: 55.5 mm) and pig (lateral: 66.8 mm, medial: 64.9 mm). The majority of the remaining dimensions of the medial and all of the remaining dimensions of the lateral menisci in sheep showed no statistical difference in comparison to the human menisci. The meniscal weight in pig was significantly larger (lateral: 6.4 g, medial: 5.0 g) than the human (lateral: 4.9 g, medial: 4.4 g) and sheep (lateral: 2.5 g, medial: 2.2 g). Porcine meniscal volume (lateral: 6.5 ml, medial: 5.1 ml) was also larger than the human (lateral: 5.0 ml, medial: 4.5 ml) and sheep (lateral: 2.3 ml, medial: 2.2 ml) menisci. The dimensions measured in the pig meniscus were generally larger than human menisci with statistically significant differences in most categories. CONCLUSION: Sheep meniscal dimensions more closely matched human meniscal dimensions than the pig meniscal dimensions. This information may help guide the choice of an animal proxy in meniscal research.