Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Virol Methods. 2014 Dec;209:116-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2014.09.004. Epub 2014 Sep 17.

Intratracheal administration of influenza virus is superior to intranasal administration as a model of acute lung injury.

Author information

1
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
2
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: k-radigan@northwestern.edu.

Abstract

Infection of mice with human or murine adapted influenza A viruses results in a severe pneumonia. However, the results of studies from different laboratories show surprising variability, even in genetically similar strains. Differences in inoculum size related to the route of viral delivery (intranasal vs. intratracheal) might explain some of this variability. To test this hypothesis, mice were infected intranasally or intratracheally with different doses of influenza A virus (A/WSN/33 [H1N1]). Daily weights, a requirement for euthanasia, viral load in the lungs and brains, inflammatory cytokines, wet-to-dry ratio, total protein and histopathology of the infected mice were examined. With all doses of influenza tested, intranasal delivery resulted in less severe lung injury, as well as smaller and more variable viral loads in the lungs when compared with intratracheal delivery. Virus was not detected in the brain following either method of delivery. It is concluded that compared to intranasal infection, intratracheal infection with influenza A virus is a more reliable method to deliver virus to the lungs.

KEYWORDS:

Influenza A infection; Inoculation; Intranasal; Intratracheal; Lung injury; Mice

PMID:
25239366
PMCID:
PMC4315182
DOI:
10.1016/j.jviromet.2014.09.004
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center