These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The comparison of three methods of drawing cerebrospinal fluid in rabbit.
    Author: Li Y, Zhang B, Wen W, Liu S, Hao D, Liu M, Kuang HX, Huang SM.
    Journal: J Neurosci Methods; 2012 Aug 15; 209(2):398-402. PubMed ID: 22750266.
    Abstract:
    Component analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is frequently required to probe the cause of disease, pathologic mechanisms and effective drugs in the experimental study of central nervous system. An ideal way of drawing CFS is very important for the successful analysis. However, pros and cons of types of CSF drawing have never been analyzed and compared. The purpose of this study was to choose an ideal method of obtaining CSF in rabbits by comparing the three usual ones: skull drilling, lumbar puncture and atlanto-occipital membrane puncture. In the study, the rabbits were randomly divided into three groups: skull drilling group, lumbar puncture group and atlanto-occipital membrane puncture group, and our modified puncture needles were used. The rates of success, operating time and repeatability, etc. of the three methods were compared. The results suggest that the atlanto-occipital membrane puncture method is the best. The method was the simplest, fastest, and most repeatable of the three, furthermore, with this method, the most CSF was drawn and achieved the highest success rate.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]