ArticleCritical care explorations2025
Comparative Evaluation of Lipopolysaccharide Administration Methods to Induce Acute Lung Injury in Murine Models: Efficacy, Consistency, and Technical Considerations.
Article in Critical care explorations, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextDirect preclinical lipopolysaccharide acute lung injury (ALI) models are commonly used to study acute respiratory distress syndrome. Differences in lipopolysaccharide delivery methods may impact lung injury severity and reproducibility. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that the severity and variability of ALI outcomes in mice would differ depending on the technique of lipopolysaccharide administration. METHODS AND MODELS: Male and female C57BL/6 mice were administered lipopolysaccharide (2.25 mg/kg) via four methods: 1) intratracheal intubation; 2) intranasal; 3) surgical transtracheal by either needle puncture; or 4) by catheter. ALI severity and variability were assessed at 72 hours post-lipopolysaccharide via histological scoring and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) analysis (total protein, cell counts, interleukin-6 [IL-6]). The relative distribution of Evans Blue dye was also assessed for each model (lungs vs. stomach).
resultsDistinct lung injury patterns were observed between the four methods. The transtracheal with catheter method demonstrated significantly greater lung injury scores than the intratracheal intubation and intranasal techniques. Both transtracheal methods produced greater alveolar neutrophil counts, increased proteinaceous debris, fewer hyaline membranes, and lower variability than non-surgical techniques. The transtracheal with catheter method produced higher BALF total cell counts and IL-6 levels than intratracheal intubation. Transtracheal methods also resulted in more localized Evans Blue dye distribution in the lungs. Male mice exhibited more severe lung injury scores and higher BALF protein concentrations than females. INTERPRETATION AND
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the choice of technique to administer lipopolysaccharide impacts injury severity, phenotype, and variability. The surgical transtracheal with catheter technique produced the most robust and least variable ALI phenotype; however, this technique is associated with increased procedural complexity. Our results will allow researchers to tailor their model choice to align with their specific study objectives.
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.