Optimization of a rat lumbar <scp>IVD</scp> degeneration model for low back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is often associated with low back pain and radiating leg pain. The purpose of this study is to develop a reproducible and standardized preclinical model of painful lumbar IVD degeneration by evaluation of structural and behavioral changes in response to IVD injury with increasing needle sizes. This model can be used to develop new therapies for IVD degeneration. METHODS: Forty-five female Sprague Dawley rats underwent anterior lumbar disc needle puncture at levels L4-5 and L5-6 under fluoroscopic guidance. Animals were randomly assigned to four different experimental groups: needle sizes of 18 Gauge (G), 21G, 23G, and sham control. To monitor the progression of IVD degeneration and pain, the following methods were employed: μMRI, qRT-PCR, histology, and biobehavioral analysis. RESULTS: T1- and T2-weighted μMRI analysis showed a correlation between the degree of IVD degeneration and needle diameter, with the most severe degeneration in the 18G group. mRNA expression of markers for IVD degeneration markers were dysregulated in the 18G and 21G groups, while pro-nociceptive markers were increased in the 18G group only. Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) and Alcian Blue/Picrosirius Red staining confirmed the most pronounced IVD degeneration in the 18G group. Randall-Selitto and von Frey tests showed increased hindpaw sensitivity in the 18G group. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that anterior disc injury with an 18G needle creates severe IVD degeneration and mechanical hypersensitivity, while the 21G needle results in moderate degeneration with no increased pain sensitivity. Therefore, needle sizes should be selected depending on the desired phenotype for the pre-clinical model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".