ArticleFrontiers in neurology2015
Lewis, Fischer 344, and sprague-dawley rats display differences in lipid peroxidation, motor recovery, and rubrospinal tract preservation after spinal cord injury.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Control Group Selection in Preclinical Rat Bone Defect Models: A Systematic Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Sex differences in central endozepine expression and regulation of appetite.Physiology & behavior · 2025Article
- Sex and Strain-Specific Variations in Motor Recovery Following Compression Spinal Cord Injury: Comparison of Sprague-Dawley and Wistar Rats.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Contusion Spinal Cord Injury Rat Model.Bio-protocol · 2017Article
- The immunomodulator decoy receptor 3 improves locomotor functional recovery after spinal cord injury.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2016Article
- Characterization of neuropathology in the HIV-1 transgenic rat at different ages.Journal of neuroimmunology · 2016Article
- Optimization of photobiomodulation therapy for spinal cord injury: A review.Photochemistry and photobiologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rat is the most common animal model for the preclinical validation of neuroprotective therapies in spinal cord injury (SCI). Lipid peroxidation (LP) is a hallmark of the damage triggered after SCI. Free radicals react with fatty acids causing cellular and membrane disruption. LP accounts for a considerable amount of neuronal cell death after SCI. To better understand the implications of inbred and outbred rat strain selection on preclinical SCI research, we evaluated LP after laminectomy sham surgery and a severe contusion of the T9 spinal cord in female Sprague-Dawley (SPD), Lewis (LEW), and Fischer 344 (F344) rats. Further analysis included locomotor recovery using the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) scale and retrograde rubrospinal tract tracing. LEW had the highest levels of LP products 72 h after sham surgery and SCI, significantly different from both F344 and SPD. SPD rats had the fastest functional recovery and highest BBB scores; these were not significantly different to F344. However, LEW rats achieved the lowest BBB scores throughout the 2-month follow-up, yielding significant differences when compared to SPD and F344. To see if the improvement in locomotion was secondary to an increase in axon survival, we evaluated rubrospinal neurons (RSNs) via retrograde labeling of the rubrospinal tract and quantified cells at the red nuclei. The highest numbers of RSNs were observed in SPD rats then F344; the lowest counts were seen in LEW rats. The BBB scores significantly correlated with the amount of positively stained RSN in the red nuclei. It is critical to identify interstrain variations as a potential confound in preclinical research. Multi-strain validation of neuroprotective therapies may increase chances of successful translation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.