Extended liver resection in mice: state of the art and pitfalls—a systematic review

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 26 - Trang 1-13 - 2021
Can Kamali1, Kaan Kamali2, Philipp Brunnbauer1, Katrin Splith3, Johann Pratschke3, Moritz Schmelzle2, Felix Krenzien3
1Department of Surgery, Campus Charité-Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
2Department of Surgery, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
3Department of Surgery, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Tóm tắt

Rodent models of liver resection have been used to investigate and evaluate the liver’s complex physiology and pathology since 1931. First documented by Higgins and Anderson, such models were created to understand liver regeneration mechanisms to improve outcomes in patients undergoing extensive liver resection for liver cancer or other underlying liver diseases. A systematic search was conducted using Pubmed, gathering publications up to January 2019, which engaged with the mouse model of extended liver resection as a method itself. The results of this search were filtered according to their language, novelty, and relevancy. The Boolean search found 3741 articles on Pubmed, with 3130 publications remaining when filtered by language and the presence of a full text. In total, 21 of these publications examined the key themes of the animal model described. The mortality varied from 0 to 50% depending on the surgeon's experience and the resection method. The liver resection was mainly performed with classic sutures (14 out of 21 publications) and isoflurane was used for anaesthesia (10 out of 21 publications) in combination with analgesics (buprenorphine or ketamine/xylazine). The most used mouse strain was C57BL/6 (7 of 21 publications) which was on average 11 weeks old with a weight of 23 g. Through the overview, laid out in the selected publications, this paper reviews the shift of the extended liver resection model from rat to the mouse, describes the state of the art in the experimental setting, and discusses the possible limitations and pitfalls. Clearly, the extended liver resection in mice is a reproducible, practical and easy to learn method.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Hori T, Nguyen JH, Zhao X, Ogura Y, Hata T, Yagi S, et al. Comprehensive and innovative techniques for liver transplantation in rats: a surgical guide. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:3120–32. Tejeda-Maldonado J, García-Juárez I, Aguirre-Valadez J, González-Aguirre A, Vilatobá-Chapa M, Armengol-Alonso A, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. World J Hepatol. 2015;7:362–76. Guglielmi A, Ruzzenente A, Conci S, Valdegamberi A, Iacono C. How much remnant is enough in liver resection? Dig Surg. 2012;29:6–17. Inderbitzin D, Studer P, Sidler D, Beldi G, Djonov V, Keogh A, et al. Regenerative capacity of individual liver lobes in the microsurgical mouse model. Microsurgery. 2006;26:465–9. Nevzorova YA, Tolba R, Trautwein C, Liedtke C. Partial hepatectomy in mice. Lab Anim. 2015;49:81–8. Meier M, Andersen KJ, Knudsen AR, Nyengaard JR, Hamilton-Dutoit S, Mortensen FV. Liver regeneration is dependent on the extent of hepatectomy. J Surg Res. 2016;205:76–84. Higgins G, Anderson R. Experimental pathology of liver: restoration of liver in white rat following partial surgical removal. AMA Arch Pathol. 1931;12:186–202. Forbes SJ, Newsome PN. Liver regeneration—mechanisms and models to clinical application. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;13:473–85. Mortensen KE, Revhaug A. Liver regeneration in surgical animal models—a historical perspective and clinical implications. Eur Surg Res. 2011;46:1–18. Jara M, Bednarsch J, Valle E, Lock JF, Malinowski M, Schulz A, et al. Reliable assessment of liver function using LiMAx. J Surg Res. 2015;193:184–9. Krenzien F, Schmelzle M, Struecker B, Raschzok N, Benzing C, Jara M, et al. Liver transplantation and liver resection for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of long-term survivals. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018;22:840–8. Agrawal S, Belghiti J. Oncologic resection for malignant tumors of the liver. Ann Surg. 2011;253:656–65. Martínez-Mier G, Esquivel-Torres S, Alvarado-Arenas RA, Ortiz-Bayliss AB, Lajud-Barquín FA, Zilli-Hernandez S. Liver resection morbidity, mortality, and risk factors at the departments of hepatobiliary surgery in Veracruz. Mexico Rev Gastroenterol Mex. 2016;81:195–201. Helling TS. Liver failure following partial hepatectomy. HPB. 2006;8:165–74. Martins PNA, Neuhaus P. Hepatic lobectomy and segmentectomy models using microsurgical techniques. Microsurgery. 2008;28:187–91. Mitchell C, Willenbring H. A reproducible and well-tolerated method for 2/3 partial hepatectomy in mice. Nat Protoc. 2008;3:1167–70. Bönninghoff R, Schwenke K, Keese M, Magdeburg R, Bitter-Suermann H, Otto M, et al. Effect of different liver resection methods on liver damage and regeneration factors VEGF and FGF-2 in mice. Can J Surg. 2012;55:389–93. Hori T, Ohashi N, Chen F, Baine A-MT, Gardner LB, Hata T, et al. Simple and reproducible hepatectomy in the mouse using the clip technique. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:2767–74. Hori T, Ohashi N, Chen F, Baine A-MT, Gardner LB, Jermanus S, et al. Simple and sure methodology for massive hepatectomy in the mouse. Ann Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;24:307–18. Orsini V, Zurbruegg S, Pikiolek M, Tchorz JS, Beckmann N. MRI as primary end point for pharmacologic experiments of liver regeneration in a murine model of partial hepatectomy. Acad Radiol. 2016;23:1446–53. Zhang C, Zhang M, Xia L, Xia Q. The benefits of ligating the lobar portal triads before partial hepatectomy in the mouse. J Invest Surg. 2010;23:224–7. Garbow JR, Kataoka M, Flye MW. MRI measurement of liver regeneration in mice following partial hepatectomy. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:177–80. Wang Y, Ye F, Ke Q, Wu Q, Yang R, Bu H. Gender-dependent histone deacetylases injury may contribute to differences in liver recovery rates of male and female mice. Transplant Proc. 2013;45:463–73. Nikfarjam M, Malcontenti-Wilson C, Fanartzis M, Daruwalla J, Christophi C. A model of partial hepatectomy in mice. J Invest Surg. 2004;17:291–4. Xu Y, Navarro-Alvarez N, Yang C, Markmann JF, Dong J, Yeh H. A reliable scoring system after major liver resection in mice. J Surg Res. 2016;204:75–82. Will OM, Damm T, Campbell GM, von Schönfells W, Açil Y, Will M, et al. Longitudinal micro-computed tomography monitoring of progressive liver regeneration in a mouse model of partial hepatectomy. Lab Anim. 2017;51:422–6. Yokoyama HO, Wilson ME, Tsuboi KK, Stowell RE. Regeneration of mouse liver after partial hepatectomy. Cancer Res. 1953;13:80–5. Sorg H, Schulz T, Krueger C, Vollmar B. Consequences of surgical stress on the kinetics of skin wound healing: partial hepatectomy delays and functionally alters dermal repair. Wound Repair Regen. 2009;17:367–77. Xie C, Wei W, Zhang T, Dirsch O, Dahmen U. Monitoring of systemic and hepatic hemodynamic parameters in mice. J Vis Exp. 2014;2:e51955. Martins PNA, Theruvath TP, Neuhaus P. Rodent models of partial hepatectomies. Liver Int. 2008;28:3–11. Kirk RGW. Recovering: The 3Rs and the human essence of animal research. Sci Technol Human Values. 2018;43:622–48. Russell WMS, Burch RL. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. 1959. Ardito F, Famularo S, Aldrighetti L, Grazi GL, DallaValle R, Maestri M, et al. The impact of hospital volume on failure to rescue after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: analysis from the HERCOLES Italian Registry. Ann Surg. 2020;272:840–6.