Histologic Comparison of the Dura Mater among Species.
Journal
Comparative medicine
ISSN: 2769-819X
Titre abrégé: Comp Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100900466
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 04 2020
01 04 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
6
2
2020
medline:
2
7
2021
entrez:
5
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The biocompatibility, biodegradation, feasibility, and efficacy of medical devices like dural sealants and substitutes are often evaluated in various animal models. However, none of these studies explain the rationale for choosing a particular species, and a systematic interspecies comparison of the dura is not available. We hypothesized that histologic characteristics of the dura would differ among species. We systematically investigated basic characteristics of the dura, including thickness, composition, and fibroblast orientation of the dura mater, in 34 samples representing 10 animal species and compared these features with human dura by using hematoxylin and eosin staining and light microscopy. Dura showed many similarities between species in terms of composition. In all species, dura consisted of at least one fibrovascular layer, which contained collagen, fibroblasts, and blood vessels, and a dural border cell layer beneath the fibrovascular layer. Differences between species included the number of fibrovascular layers, fibroblast orientation, and dural thickness. Human dura was the thickest (564 μm) followed by equine (313 μm), bovine (311 μm), and porcine (304 μm) dura. Given the results of this study and factors such as gross anatomy, feasibility, housing, and ethical considerations, we recommend the use of a porcine model for dural research, especially for in vivo studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32014084
doi: 10.30802/AALAS-CM-19-000022
pmc: PMC7137549
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
170-175Références
Anesth Analg. 1989 Dec;69(6):768-72
pubmed: 2589658
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011 Dec;153(12):2465-72
pubmed: 21989779
Childs Nerv Syst. 2012 Jun;28(6):827-37
pubmed: 22526439
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2014;54(8):640-6
pubmed: 25070015
Surg Neurol. 2006 Jan;65(1):42-7; discussion 47
pubmed: 16378853
Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2009 Dec;30(6):559-64
pubmed: 20099639
Anesthesiology. 1990 Dec;73(6):1214-9
pubmed: 2248398
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997 Jul;100(1):23-31
pubmed: 9207655
J Comp Neurol. 1975 Nov 15;164(2):127-69
pubmed: 810497
Am J Pathol. 1978 Jul;92(1):53-68
pubmed: 686148
Neurosurgery. 2018 Mar 1;82(3):397-406
pubmed: 28575349
J Biomed Mater Res. 1991 Feb;25(2):267-76
pubmed: 2055920
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014 Oct;27(4):691-726
pubmed: 25278572
J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Dec;19(6):736-43
pubmed: 24074508
Laryngoscope. 1988 Jun;98(6 Pt 1):625-7
pubmed: 2453770
Neurol Res. 2001 Dec;23(8):813-20
pubmed: 11760872
World Neurosurg. 2012 Mar-Apr;77(3-4):577-82
pubmed: 22120335
Bull Exp Biol Med. 2018 Jan;164(3):402-403
pubmed: 29308555
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013 Sep;115(9):1735-7
pubmed: 23622936
Lab Anim. 2018 Oct;52(5):504-514
pubmed: 29458296
Eur Spine J. 2007 Jul;16(7):1063-72
pubmed: 17334794
J Med Eng Technol. 2018 Feb;42(2):128-139
pubmed: 29569970
Neurol Res. 2016 Sep;38(9):799-808
pubmed: 27487559
Neurosurgery. 1993 Jan;32(1):111-20
pubmed: 8421539
Pediatr Radiol. 2009 Mar;39(3):200-10
pubmed: 19165479
Neurol Res. 2014 Oct;36(10):866-72
pubmed: 24601724
Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 1994 Dec;15(6):454-65
pubmed: 7880562
Exp Ther Med. 2017 Nov;14(5):5114-5120
pubmed: 29201224
J Neurosurg. 2018 Apr;128(4):1020-1027
pubmed: 28452616
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2005 Aug;147(8):877-87
pubmed: 15912254
J Anat. 1998 Jan;192 ( Pt 1):99-106
pubmed: 9568565
J Exp Med. 2015 Jun 29;212(7):991-9
pubmed: 26077718
Acta Biomater. 2017 Jul 15;57:384-394
pubmed: 28501711