• Various animal models such as for endotoxemia, endotoxic shock, or bacteremia have been used to study the pathobiology of sepsis, and such models provided useful information regarding the mechanism of cell and organ dysfunctions under those conditions. However, those models do not permit control of the source of infection. • A number of investigators have used cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) in various species to produce polymicrobial sepsis. The CLP model of sepsis mimics many features of clinical peritonitis, including the progressive changes in cardiovascular responses (i.e., an early hyperdynamic phase followed by a late hypodynamic phase). • The CLP model of sepsis is associated with cellular dysfunction (such as hepatocellular depression) and upregulation of proinflammatory cytokines (such as TNF). Furthermore, the ligated and punctured cecum can be excised at various intervals to serve as a source control model of sepsis. Such a model can be used for testing pharmacological agents in the management of sepsis.
KeywordsDepression Heparin Gelatin Adenine Peritonitis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 6.Wang H, Bloom O, Zhang M, Vishnubhakat JM, Ombrellino M, Che J, Frazier A, Yang H, Ivanova S, Borovikova L, Manogue KR, Faist E, Abraham E, Andersson J, Andersson U, Molina PE, Abumrad NN, Sama A, Tracey KJ (1999) HMG-1 as a late mediator of endotoxin lethality in mice. Science 285:248–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Hadjiminas DJ, McMasters KM, Robertson SE, Cheadle WG (1994) Enhanced survival from cecal ligation and puncture with pentoxifylline is associated with altered neutrophil trafficking and reduced interleukin-1b expression but not inhibition of tumor necrosis factor synthesis. Surgery 116:348–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Wang P, Chaudry IH (1996) Mechanism of hepatocellular dysfunction during hyperdynamic sepsis. Am J Physiol 270:R927-R938Google Scholar
- 21.Ahrenholz DH, Simmons RL (1980) Fibrin in peritonitis. I. Beneficial and adverse effects of fibrin in experimental E. coli peritonitis. Surgery 88:41–47Google Scholar