ArticleScientific reports2025
A modified surgical approach to induce circle Willis perforation in mice using the common carotid artery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Circle of Willis perforation (cWp) mouse model is widely used in subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) research but involves sacrificing the external carotid artery (ECA), which may have a potential affect on the hemodynamic in the carotid arteries and cortical perfusion. We propose a modified approach using needle puncture via the common carotid artery (CCA) to preserve carotid vascular integrity. Twenty-seven C57BL/6 mice were randomly assigned into three groups and underwent cWp surgery in three procedures: sham (n = 3), ECA (n = 12), and CCA (n = 12). Surgical duration, success rate, intraoperative intracranial pressure (ICP) fluctuations, 24-hour mortality, and neurological deficits were assessed. The CCA approach achieved a 100% success rate and shorter surgical duration than the ECA approach (ECA 73 ± 18 vs. CCA 36 ± 10 min, P < 0.05). ICP fluctuations and mortality rates were comparable between the ECA and CCA groups (P > 0.05), indicating that the CCA approach shared a similar pattern with the ECA approach. Neurological outcomes were similar across SAH groups (CCA SAH induction and ECA SAH induction) but worse than sham (P < 0.05) in terms of body weight loss, open-filed test and Rotarod test performances. This modified cWp CCA approach, which preserves the carotid structures, helps eliminate hemodynamic bias and offers a potentially more efficient alternative with a shorter surgical duration compared to the classical ECA approach. It may prove to be a valuable option for broader application in SAH preclinical research.
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.