Basic Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 28, 2015; 21(16): 4875-4882
Published online Apr 28, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i16.4875
Comparison of two different laparotomy methods for modeling rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma
Zhu Chen, Zhen Kang, En-Hua Xiao, Min Tong, Yu-Dong Xiao, Hua-Bing Li
Zhu Chen, Zhen Kang, En-Hua Xiao, Yu-Dong Xiao, Hua-Bing Li, Department of Radiology, the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410011, Hunan Province, China
Min Tong, Experimental Animal Center, the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410011, Hunan Province, China
Author contributions: Xiao EH and Chen Z designed the research; Chen Z, Kang Z, Tong M and Li HB performed the research; Chen Z, Kang Z and Xiao YD analyzed the data and wrote the paper.
Supported by Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China, No. 14JJ2034; Project of the Development and Reform Commission of Hunan Province, China, No. 2013-1199; Project of the Science and Technology Department of Hunan Province, China, No. 2014TT2017.
Ethics approval: The study was reviewed and approved by the Second Xiangya Hospital Institutional Review Board.
Institutional animal care and use committee: All procedures involving animals were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Second Xiangya Hospital (SYXK 2012-003).
Conflict-of-interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest. Chen Z has received research funding from the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China (No. 14JJ2034). Li HB has received research funding from a Project of the Development and Reform Commission of Hunan Province, China (No. 2013-1199). Tong M has received research funding from a Project of the Science and Technology Department of Hunan Province, China (No. 2014TT2017). Chen Z and Xiao EH are employees of Second Xiangya Hospital. Chen Z and Xiao EH own stocks and/or shares in Second Xiangya Hospital.
Data sharing: Participants gave informed consent for data sharing. No additional data are available.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: En-Hua Xiao, MD, Professor, Department of Radiology, the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, No. 139 Renmin Zhong Lu, Fu Rong District, Changsha 410011, Hunan Province, China. cjr.xiaoenhua@vip.163.com
Telephone: +86-731-85292116 Fax: +86-731-85292116
Received: October 22, 2014
Peer-review started: October 28, 2014
First decision: December 11, 2014
Revised: January 4, 2015
Accepted: February 11, 2015
Article in press: February 11, 2015
Published online: April 28, 2015
Abstract

AIM: To compare two different laparotomy methods for modeling rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma.

METHODS: Thirty New Zealand rabbits were randomly divided into two groups: A and B. Group A was assigned a traditional laparotomy method (embedding tumor fragments directly into the liver with tweezers). Group B was subjected to an improved laparotomy method (injection of tumor fragments into the liver through a 15 G syringe needle). The operation time, incision length, incision infection rate, and mortality rate were compared between the two groups after laparotomy. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed to evaluate tumor formation rates and the characteristics of the tumors 2 wk after laparotomy.

RESULTS: The mean operation times for the two groups (Group A vs Group B) were 23.2 ± 3.4 min vs 17.5 ± 2.9 min (P < 0.05); the incision length was 3.3 ± 0.5 cm vs 2.4 ± 0.6 cm (P < 0.05); and the mortality rate after 2 wk was 26.7% vs 0% (P < 0.05); all of these outcomes were significantly different between the two groups. The incision infection rates in the two groups were 6.7% vs 0% (P > 0.05), which were not significantly different. MRI performed after 2 weeks showed that the tumor formation rates in the two groups were 90.9% vs 93.3% (P > 0.05). These rates were not significantly different between the two groups. The celiac implantation rate and abdominal wall metastasis rate in the two groups were 36.4% vs 13.3% (P < 0.05) and 27.2% vs 6.7% (P < 0.05), respectively, which were significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: The tumor formation rates were not significantly different between the two methods for modeling rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma. However, the improved method is recommended because it has certain advantages.

Keywords: Rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma, Laparotomy, Modeling, Magnetic resonance imaging

Core tip: A crucial issue in studying liver cancer is the establishment of an animal model to simulate human liver cancer. There are various ways to establish rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma, and using an open laparotomy implant is a widely adopted classical method. We injected tumor fragments into the left lobe of the rabbit liver, deviating from the abdominal wall using a 15 G syringe needle instead of building a sinus using tweezers. This improved method is recommended because of advantages such as decreased injury to the liver, shorter operation time, lower death rates, reduced abdominal cavity implantation and fewer abdominal wall invasions.