Mouse Model of Posttraumatic Abdominal Sepsis: Survival Advantage of Females over Males Does Not Depend on the Cecum Size

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Regardless of whether alone or in combination, cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) is the most commonly used model to emulate human polymicrobial sepsis. Numerous CLP studies have shown that female mice survive better than males. In adult mice, this effect may be partly due to the unequal cecum mass (larger in males), as cecum ligation is frequently not size standardized. Comparing two ligation approaches, we investigated whether cecum size influences gender-specific outcome differences. METHODS: 15-month-old (middle-aged) female and male CD-1 mice underwent sublethal trauma/hemorrhage followed by CLP 48 h later. The evaluation of cecum size (in centimeters) and filling (score) was immediately followed by two ligation protocols: (1) ileocecal ligation (IC-L; n = 28/each gender) below the ileocecal valve, and (2) apex ligation (AP-L; n = 31 males, n = 24 females) 2 cm from the apex ceci - all followed by an identical double puncture and 10-day monitoring. RESULTS: Cecum length (3.4 cm in males vs. 2.65 cm in females) and filling (2.5 score points in males vs. 1.7 in females; both p < 0.05) were always greater in male than female mice (27 vs. 44%, respectively). Compared to AP-L, the 10-day CLP mortality was higher with IC-L (86% in males and 61% in females), and this exacerbation was similar in both genders (by 21% in male and 23% in female mice). Finally, the intergender comparison demonstrated that female mice displayed a significant and similar survival advantage regardless of the ligation approach: the difference reached 25% with IC-L and 24% with AP-L. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization by AP-L did not eliminate the gender-specific difference in mortality due to posttraumatic sepsis. The greater cecum length/filling in middle-aged male mice was not responsible for their inferior survival compared to females.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.