Cargando…

Testing the effects of sensory stimulation as a collateral-based therapeutic for ischemic stroke in C57BL/6J and CD1 mouse strains

Utilizing a rat model of ischemic stroke, we have previously shown that sensory stimulation can completely protect rats from impending ischemic damage of cortex if this treatment is delivered within the first two hours post-permanent middle cerebral artery occlusion (pMCAo). The current study sought...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hancock, Aneeka M., Frostig, Ron D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5597132/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28902897
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183909
Descripción
Sumario:Utilizing a rat model of ischemic stroke, we have previously shown that sensory stimulation can completely protect rats from impending ischemic damage of cortex if this treatment is delivered within the first two hours post-permanent middle cerebral artery occlusion (pMCAo). The current study sought to extend our findings in rats to mice, which would allow new avenues of research not available in rats. Thus, young adult C57BL/6J and CD1 mice were tested for protection from ischemic stroke with the same protective sensory stimulation-based treatment. Cortical activity and blood flow were assessed with intrinsic signal optical imaging (ISOI) and laser speckle imaging (LSI), respectively, and histological analysis (TTC) was performed at the completion of the experiments. Standing in stark contrast to the positive results observed in rats, in both strains we found that there were no differences between treated and untreated mice at 24 hours post-pMCAo in terms of infarct volume, negative functional imaging results, and major reduction in retrograde collateral blood flow as compared to pre-pMCAo baseline and surgical controls. Also, no differences were found between the strains in terms of theses variables. Potential reasons for the differences between rats and mice are discussed.