(1. 河北省人民医院普外三科,石家庄 050000; 2. 河北省人民医院肿瘤科,石家庄 050000; 3. 河北医科大学第四医院,石家庄 050000; 4. 石家庄市第一医院外三科,石家庄 050000)
R-33
(1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang 050000, China. 2. Department of Oncology, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang 050000. 3. The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050000. 4. Department of Surgery, Shijiazhuang First Hospital, Shijiazhuang 050000)
目的 探究C57BL/6 小鼠不同尾静脉注射方法的差异,为小鼠尾静脉注射提供更为安全?可靠?成功率高的基础实验依据?方法 将320 只小鼠按照随机数字法随机分成4 组:空白对照组?白炽灯烘烤法组?三头线法组和联合应用法组?选择穿刺小鼠左侧或右侧外周静脉进行取血,记录各组穿刺成功率,采用SPSS 13.0 统计软件进行分析,比较各组间的统计学差异?结果 与空白对照组相比,白炽灯烘烤法组?三头线法组和联合应用法组穿刺成功率均显著提高( P < 0.001)?其中,三头线法组优于白炽灯烘烤法组( P < 0.001),而联合应用法组成功率则明显高于三头线法组和白炽灯烘烤法组( P < 0.001)?结论 C57BL/6 小鼠尾静脉不同注射方法中,联合应用法操作简单,可重复性高,穿刺成功率很高,值得进一步推广使用?
Objective Four different methods were examined to identify a safer and more reliable method for tail vein punctures in C57BL/6 mice. Methods In total, 320 mice were randomly divided into four groups: a blank group, incandescent lamp baking method group, three-line method group, and combined method group. Blood samples were taken from the left or right peripheral vein of puncture mice. Puncture success rate of each group was recorded. SPSS 13.0 software was used to compare statistical difference among groups. Results Compared with the blank group, success rates of the other three methods were significantly higher ( P < 0.001). Further, the three-line method was better than the incandescent lamp baking method ( P < 0.001). The success rate of the combined method was significantly higher than the three-line and incandescent lamp baking methods ( P < 0.001). Conclusions The combined method greatly improved the success rate of tail vein punctures in C57BL/6 mice. This method is more reliable and should be more widely used in the future.
温军业,范晓燕,何东伟,张万星,黄书静,张宇龙. C57BL/6 小鼠尾静脉四种穿刺方法的比较[J].中国比较医学杂志,2018,28(5):105~108.
复制