Large Animal Stroke Models vs. Rodent Stroke Models, Pros and Cons, and Combination?

Abstract

Stroke is a leading cause of serious long-term disability worldwide and the second leading cause of death in many countries. Long-time attempts to salvage dying neurons via various neuroprotective agents have failed in stroke translational research, owing in part to the huge gap between animal stroke models and stroke patients, which also suggests that rodent models have limited predictive value and that alternate large animal models are likely to become important in future translational research. The genetic background, physiological characteristics, behavioral characteristics, and brain structure of large animals, especially nonhuman primates, are analogous to humans, and resemble humans in stroke. Moreover, relatively new regional imaging techniques, measurements of regional cerebral blood flow, and sophisticated physiological monitoring can be more easily performed on the same animal at multiple time points. As a result, we can use large animal stroke models to decrease the gap and promote translation of basic science stroke research. At the same time, we should not neglect the disadvantages of the large animal stroke model such as the significant expense and ethical considerations, which can be overcome by rodent models. Rodents should be selected as stroke models for initial testing and primates or cats are desirable as a second species, which was recommended by the Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) group in 2009.