Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Analysis and comparison of a spinal cord injury model with a single-axle-lever clip or a parallel-moving clip compression in rats

Abstract

Study design

Experimental animal study.

Objectives

To assess the feasibility of a custom-designed parallel-moving (PM) clip, compared with a single-axle-lever (SAL) clip, for the development of a compressional spinal cord injury (SCI) model in rats.

Setting

Hospital laboratory in China.

Methods

We used a PM clip and a SAL clip with same compression rate, to develop a SCI model in rats, and set a sham group as a blank control. Within 3 weeks, each group of rats was evaluated for behavioral (Basso–Beattie–Bresnahan locomotor rating score, BBB), and electrophysiological changes (somatosensory evoked potential), and historical staining to observe the differences between the three groups. In particular, the mechanical results of the PM group were calculated.

Results

The BBB scores for the SAL and PM groups were significantly lower than those for the sham group (P < 0.05), no significant difference between the two methods (P > 0.05), but the values corresponding to the PM group had smaller standard deviations. The interpeak-latency (IPL) was significantly prolonged (P < 0.0001) and the peak-peak amplitude (PPA) was significantly reduced (P < 0.01) in SAL and PM groups than those in the sham group, but there was no statistical difference in both IPL and PPA between the two SCI groups (P > 0.05). Histological staining showed obvious pathological changes in two SCI groups, and the shape of the lesion zone in the PM group was more symmetrical than that in the SAL groups.

Conclusions

The use of a compressional SCI model in rats with the PM clip we designed is an appropriate method to quantify the injury. The degree of the injury caused by this clip is more stable and uniform than those with classical methods.

Your institute does not have access to this article

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Spinal cord clipping device.
Fig. 2: Spinal cord clipping surgery was performed to establish SCI model with clip compression in rat.
Fig. 3: Graphs of behavioral and electrophysiological data over time.

References

  1. Ramer LM, Ramer MS, Bradbury EJ. Restoring function after spinal cord injury: towards clinical translation of experimental strategies. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:1241–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kretzer, RM. A clinical perspective and definition of spinal cord injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41:S27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cannon B. Sensation and loss. Nature. 2013;503:S2.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Liu D, Chen J, Jiang T, Li W, Huang Y, Lu X, et al. Biodegradable spheres protect traumatically injured spinal cord by alleviating the glutamate-induced excitotoxicity. Adv Mater. 2018;30:e1706032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rivlin AS, Tator CH. Effect of duration of acute spinal cord compression in a new acute cord injury model in the rat. Surgical Neurol. 1978;10:38–43.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lv H, Yang J, Liao Z, Zhao Y, Huang Y. NG2 expression in rats with acute T (10) spinal cord injury. Neural Regen Res. 2012;05:41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cheriyan T, Ryan DJ, Weinreb JH, Cheriyan J, Paul JC, Lafage V, et al. Spinal cord injury models: a review. Spinal Cord 2014;52:588–95.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. do Espírito Santo CC, da Silva Fiorin F, Ilha J, Duarte MMMF, Duarte T, Santos ARS. Spinal cord injury by clip-compression induces anxiety and depression-like behaviours in female rats: The role of the inflammatory response. Brain Behav Immun. 2019;78:91–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chamankhah M, Eftekharpour E, Karimi-Abdolrezaee S, Boutros PC, San-Marina S, Fehlings MG. Genome-wide gene expression profiling of stress response in a spinal cord clip compression injury model. BMC Genomics. 2013;14:583.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Poon PC, Gupta D, Shoichet MS, Tator CH. Clip compression model is useful for thoracic spinal cord injuries: histologic and functional correlates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2853–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Abdullahi D, Annuar AA, Mohamad M, Aziz I, Sanusi J. Experimental spinal cord trauma: a review of mechanically induced spinal cord injury in rat models. Rev Neurosci 2017;28:15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ichikawa Y, Nishimoto T, Niwa K. TAILSTOCK CONTROL DEVICE, US20090199685[P]. 2009.

  13. Vaughn CN, Iafrate JL, Henley JB, Stevenson EK, Shlifer IG, Jones TB. Cellular neuroinflammation in a lateral forceps compression model of spinal cord injury. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2013;296:1229–46.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Khaing ZZ, Cates LN, DeWees DM, Hannah A, Mourad P, Bruce M, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound to visualize hemodynamic changes after rodent spinal cord injury. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018;29:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Guo J, Cao G, Yang G, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Song W, et al. Transplantation of activated olfactory ensheathing cells by curcumin strengthens regeneration and recovery of function after spinal cord injury in rats. Cytotherapy. 2020;22:301–12.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sharif-Alhoseini M, Khormali M, Rezaei M, Safdarian M, Hajighadery A, Khalatbari MM, et al. Animal models of spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2017;55:714–21.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rong H, Liu Y, Zhao Z, Feng J, Sun R, Ma Z, et al. Further Standardization in the Aneurysm Clip: The Effects of Occlusal Depth on the Outcome of Spinal Cord Injury in Rats. Spine. 2018;43:E126–E131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McDonough A, Monterrubio A, Ariza J, Martínez-Cerdeño V. Calibrated forceps model of spinal cord compression injury. J Vis Exp. 2015;98:52318.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Plemel JR, Duncan G, Chen KW, Shannon C, Park S, Sparling JS, et al. A graded forceps crush spinal cord injury model in mice. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25:350–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Usmani S, Franceschi Biagioni A, Medelin M, Scaini D, Casani R, Aurand ER, et al. Functional rewiring across spinal injuries via biomimetic nanofiber scaffolds. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2020;117:25212–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Agrawal G, Kerr C, Thakor NV, All AH. Characterization of graded mascis contusion spinal cord injury using somatosensory evoked potentials. Spine. 2010;35:1122–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rowland JW, Hawryluk GW, Kwon B, Fehlings MG. Current status of acute spinal cord injury pathophysiology and emerging therapies: promise on the horizon. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25:E2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Denis F. The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine. 1983;8:817–31.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ahmed RU, Alam M, Zheng YP. Experimental spinal cord injury and behavioral tests in laboratory rats. Heliyon. 2019;5:e01324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank AiMi Academic Services (www.aimieditor.com) for the English language editing and review services.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81830077).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

XHW was responsible for designing the protocol, writing the protocol, design the device for surgery, participate in experimental operation, evaluating and writing the article; CJ was responsible for improving the experimental ideas and writing the protocol, participate in experimental operation in each tests, result collection and result analysis; YYZ and ZC guiding the modeling surgery, screening potentially eligible studies; ZYW assisted in the operation, recording partial postoperative indicators; HY help us solving some technical problems encountered; DJH providing financial support.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ding-jun Hao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

We certify that all experimental procedures were performed in accordance with the Guide of Laboratory Animal Care and Use from the United States National Institution of Health and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of Xi’an Jiaotong University, SN, China.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Xh., Jiang, C., Zhang, Yy. et al. Analysis and comparison of a spinal cord injury model with a single-axle-lever clip or a parallel-moving clip compression in rats. Spinal Cord 60, 332–338 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-021-00720-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-021-00720-7

Search

Quick links