Animal stroke models and outcome evaluation: A review.

IF 3.4 Q1 Health Professions
Solsa Cariba, Helen M Atkinson, Anthony K C Chan
{"title":"Animal stroke models and outcome evaluation: A review.","authors":"Solsa Cariba, Helen M Atkinson, Anthony K C Chan","doi":"10.1002/ame2.70289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stroke is among the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, and despite extensive research, prevalence is increasing. This has been partly attributed to systemic flaws in experimental design principles in studies involving stroke, and much work has been done to improve the standards of study design. In this article, different animal models mimicking ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke will be reviewed. Historical models will be discussed, as well as the more commonly employed modern techniques, such as thromboembolic occlusion and intraluminal filament occlusion models. This will be followed by a discussion of the selection of species for experimental animals, including the pros and cons of each. The various criteria used as metrics for evaluating post-stroke outcomes will also be reviewed, including but not limited to sensorimotor and cognitive impairment. Techniques for the evaluation of molecular, cellular, and hematological phenotypes will also be reviewed, including but not limited to in vitro and ex vivo cell culture, co-culture, and RNA/protein expression assays. Finally, a selection of key criteria and factors which have been historically neglected will be discussed, such as age and sex.</p>","PeriodicalId":93869,"journal":{"name":"Animal models and experimental medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13594408/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal models and experimental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ame2.70289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stroke is among the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, and despite extensive research, prevalence is increasing. This has been partly attributed to systemic flaws in experimental design principles in studies involving stroke, and much work has been done to improve the standards of study design. In this article, different animal models mimicking ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke will be reviewed. Historical models will be discussed, as well as the more commonly employed modern techniques, such as thromboembolic occlusion and intraluminal filament occlusion models. This will be followed by a discussion of the selection of species for experimental animals, including the pros and cons of each. The various criteria used as metrics for evaluating post-stroke outcomes will also be reviewed, including but not limited to sensorimotor and cognitive impairment. Techniques for the evaluation of molecular, cellular, and hematological phenotypes will also be reviewed, including but not limited to in vitro and ex vivo cell culture, co-culture, and RNA/protein expression assays. Finally, a selection of key criteria and factors which have been historically neglected will be discussed, such as age and sex.

动物脑卒中模型及预后评价综述。
中风是世界范围内导致死亡和残疾的主要原因之一,尽管进行了广泛的研究,但其患病率仍在上升。这部分归因于涉及中风的研究中实验设计原则的系统性缺陷,并且已经做了许多工作来提高研究设计的标准。本文将对模拟缺血性和出血性中风的不同动物模型进行综述。将讨论历史模型,以及更常用的现代技术,如血栓栓塞和腔内纤维闭塞模型。接下来将讨论实验动物的物种选择,包括每种动物的优缺点。作为评估卒中后预后指标的各种标准也将被回顾,包括但不限于感觉运动和认知障碍。评估分子、细胞和血液学表型的技术也将被回顾,包括但不限于体外和离体细胞培养、共培养和RNA/蛋白质表达测定。最后,将讨论历史上被忽视的关键标准和因素的选择,如年龄和性别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书