MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412701577 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000001292

Comparative Evaluation of Lipopolysaccharide Administration Methods to Induce Acute Lung Injury in Murine Models: Efficacy, Consistency, and Technical Considerations

2025· article· en· W4412701577 on OpenAlexaff
Eva Kuhar, Duncan J. Stewart, Doreen Engelberts, Forough Jahandideh, Matthew S. Jeffers, Julie Khang, Haibo Zhang, Arnold S. Kristof, Bernard Thébaud, Arul Vadivel, Dean Fergusson, Manoj M. Lalu

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of TorontoMcGill University Health CentreSt. Michael's HospitalOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBronchoalveolar lavageLipopolysaccharideLungContext (archaeology)AnesthesiaEvans BluePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Direct 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). RESULTS: Distinct 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 CONCLUSIONS: This 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.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207