Effects of sevoflurane and isoflurane on acute myocardial infarction model establishment in mice

Abstract

The selection of anesthetic drugs in the preparation of an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) model is very important. We specifically focus on various effects of sevoflurane and isoflurane in a murine AMI model, which have not been previously compared. Furthermore, we evaluated success of our AMI model using following methods: echocardiography, TTC staining, and PCR testing. The results show that compared to the isoflurane group, the sevoflurane group mice had shorter anesthetic induction(66.40 ± 2.90S vs. 125.10 ± 6.30S P < 0.0001) and recovery times(28.00 ± 1.07S vs. 56.88 ± 4.14S, P < 0.0001), lower incidence of respiratory depression (0 % vs. 50.00 %, P = 0.0325), and more successful models (93.33 % vs. 60.00 %, P = 0.0801). There were no significant differences in cardiac function, infarction area(49.41 ± 4.18 % vs. 48.66 ± 3.79 %, P = 0.5266), or inflammatory factors in the myocardial infarction area between the two groups. Sevoflurane may therefore be a better choice for the establishment of AMI models in mice.

Keywords: Acute myocardial infarction; Animal model; Inhalation anesthetics; Mice.

Fig. 1

No differences were observed in the weight of the mice before surgery between the SEV and ISO groups. Data (mean ± SEM) were analyzed using an unpaired t-test. n = 10/group.

Fig. 2

Comparison of anesthesia effects between the SEV and ISO groups. A. comparison of induction time between the SEV (n = 10)and ISO group (n = 10). B. Comparison of recovery time between the SEV (n = 10) and ISO group (n = 8). C. Comparison of respiratory depression between the SEV (n = 10)and ISO group (n = 10). Data (mean ± SEM) in A and B were analyzed using an unpaired t-test. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM. Data (absolute count) in C were analyzed using a chi-squared test.

Fig. 3

Comparison of Success rate of AMI modeling and survival rate between the SEV and ISO groups. A. Comparison of the success rate of the AMI model between the SEV (n = 15) and ISO group (n = 15). B. Comparison of the survival rate between the SEV (n = 15) and ISO group (n = 15). Data (absolute count) in A were analyzed using a chi-squared test. Data in B were evaluated using a log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test.

Fig. 4

Comparison of cardiac functions during the days before surgery and at 1, 3, and 7 days after AMI between the SEV and ISO group. A. Echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), B. left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFS), C. end-diastolic volume (EDV), D. end-systolic volume (ESV), E. left ventricular end-diastole internal diameter (LVIDd), and F. left ventricular end-systolic internal diameter (LVIDs) were measured on the days before surgery and 1, 3, and 7 after AMI. Sample sizes were n = 8–15 for SEV mice and n = 5–15 for ISO mice. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM, and two-way ANOVA was used to analyze repeated measurements, followed by the Bonferroni post hoc test.

Fig. 5

Comparison of infarct areas between the SEV and ISO groups. A. Representative TTC image of the SEV and ISO groups. B. The infarction area of the SEV and ISO groups (n = 3 for SEV and n = 3 for ISO). Data (mean ± SEM) in B were analyzed using an unpaired t-test.

Fig. 6

Comparison of inflammatory levels between the SEV and ISO groups. A. The mRNA level of IL-1β B. TNF-α, C. IL-6, and D. IL-10 in infarct areas three days post AMI were comparable between groups. All data were analyzed using an unpaired t-test. Sample sizes were n = 4–5 for SEV mice and n = 4–5 for ISO mice. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM.