Scientific Reports (Apr 2021)

Intranasal versus intratracheal exposure to lipopolysaccharides in a murine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome

  • Fatemeh Khadangi,
  • Anne-Sophie Forgues,
  • Sophie Tremblay-Pitre,
  • Alexis Dufour-Mailhot,
  • Cyndi Henry,
  • Magali Boucher,
  • Marie-Josée Beaulieu,
  • Mathieu Morissette,
  • Liah Fereydoonzad,
  • David Brunet,
  • Annette Robichaud,
  • Ynuk Bossé

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87462-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Due to frequent and often severe lung affections caused by COVID-19, murine models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are increasingly used in experimental lung research. The one induced by a single lipopolysaccharide (LPS) exposure is practical. However, whether it is preferable to administer LPS intranasally or intratracheally remains an open question. Herein, female C57Bl/6 J mice were exposed intranasally or intratracheally to one dose of either saline or 3 mg/kg of LPS. They were studied 24 h later. The groups treated with LPS, either intranasally or intratracheally, exhibited a pronounced neutrophilic inflammation, signs of lung tissue damage and protein extravasation into the alveoli, and mild lung dysfunction. The magnitude of the response was generally not different between groups exposed intranasally versus intratracheally. However, the variability of some the responses was smaller in the LPS-treated groups exposed intranasally versus intratracheally. Notably, the saline-treated mice exposed intratracheally demonstrated a mild neutrophilic inflammation and alterations of the airway epithelium. We conclude that an intranasal exposure is as effective as an intratracheal exposure in a murine model of ARDS induced by LPS. Additionally, the groups exposed intranasally demonstrated less variability in the responses to LPS and less complications associated with the sham procedure.