CCA repair or ECA ligation—Which middle cerebral artery occlusion is better in the reperfusion mouse model?

Abstract

AbstractA reliable animal model is essential for ischemic stroke research. The implications of the external carotid artery (ECA) transection or common carotid artery (CCA) ligation have been described. Thus, a modified animal model, the CCA‐repair model, has been established, and studies have shown that the CCA‐repair model has potential advantages over the CCA‐ligation model. However, whether the CCA‐repair model is superior to the ECA‐ligation model remains unclear. Sixty male C57BL/6 mice were randomly assigned to establish the CCA‐repair (n = 34) or ECA‐ligation (n = 26) models. Cerebral blood flow before middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO), immediately after MCAO and reperfusion were monitored and the operation duration, postoperative body weight, and food intake within 7 days, and the number of intraoperative and postoperative deaths within 7 days were recorded in the two models. Modified neurological severity scores and Bederson (0–5) scores were used to evaluate postoperative neurological function deficits on Days 1/3/5/7. 2,3,5‐Triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining was used to quantify lesion volume on Day 7 after the operation. We found the establishment of the CCA‐repair model required a longer total operation duration (p = 0.0175), especially the operation duration of reperfusion (p < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference in body weight and food intake development, lesion volume and intragroup variability, neurological function deficits, mortality, and survival probability between the two groups. The CCA‐repair model has no significant advantage over the ECA‐ligation model. The ECA‐ligation model is still a better choice for focal cerebral ischemia.