ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Mouse models for post-sepsis syndrome: a comparison of cecal slurry injection model versus two cecal ligation and puncture models.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis survivors commonly suffer from chronic Post-Sepsis Syndrome (PSS). To understand the mechanisms of PSS, it is critical to utilize appropriate animal models. While cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) is a widely used model of sepsis, a concern exists regarding its suitability for studying long-term outcomes. Alternatively, we previously optimized a highly reproducible murine cecal slurry (CS)-injection model of sepsis. The objective of this study was to compare the suitability of CS and CLP models for investigating PSS. Methods: Male 4-month-old C57BL/6 mice were divided into 7 groups: (1) Naïve control; (2) Sham: laparotomy control; (3) CL: cecal ligation control without puncture; (4) CLP: conventional cecal ligation and puncture (21Gx2); (5) CLP-D: CLP followed by surgical removal (i.e., debridement) of the ligated distal cecum; (6) CS: cecal slurry injection; and (7) vehicle injection control for CS. All mice except for Naïve, received repeated antibiotics and fluid resuscitation starting at 12 h after infection or the control procedure. Blood samples were collected at 6 h and 1-month for IL-6 ELISA. A month later, all mice were euthanized, and qRT-PCR was performed to assess IL-6 gene expression in several tissues including the cecum. Results: Equivalent sepsis severity was confirmed in the sepsis groups (CS, CLP, and CLP-D) by similar survival rates (73-78%) and acute 6 h-plasma IL-6 levels (63.3-159.6 pg./mL). A month later, large abscesses, deformed necrotic tissues, and aberrant adhesions were frequently present in and around the cecum of CL, CLP, and CLP-D mice. Elevated levels of plasma IL-6 (>25 pg./mL) 1-month after sepsis induction were observed in both the CL and CLP groups and also in the CLP-D group to a lesser degree. Strong IL-6 gene expression was found only in the ligated distal cecum from the CLP and CL groups. The cecum abnormality and high levels of plasma IL-6 were completely absent in the CS group. Conclusion: The CLP model is accompanied with abnormal cecum which persistently produces IL-6. The CLP-D model with debridement reduces such problems to some extent but not completely. Because such experimental artifacts are absent in the CS model, this model appears to be better suited for studying PSS.
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.