COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Architectural assessment of rhesus macaque pelvic floor muscles: comparison for use as a human model.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Animal models are essential to further our understanding of the independent and combined function of human pelvic floor muscles (PFMs), as direct studies in women are limited. To assure suitability of the rhesus macaque (RM), we compared RM and human PFM architecture, the strongest predictor of muscle function. We hypothesized that relative to other models, RM best resembles human PFM.

METHODS: Major architectural parameters of cadaveric human coccygeus, iliococcygeus, and pubovisceralis (pubococcygeus + puborectalis) and corresponding RM coccygeus, iliocaudalis, and pubovisceralis (pubovaginalis + pubocaudalis) were compared using 1- and 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc testing. Architectural difference index (ADI), a combined measure of functionally relevant structural parameters predictive of length-tension, force-generation, and excursional muscle properties was used to compare PFMs across RM, rabbit, rat, and mouse.

RESULTS: RM and human PFMs were similar with respect to architecture. However, the magnitude of similarity varied between individual muscles, with the architecture of the most distinct RM PFM, iliocaudalis, being well suited for quadrupedal locomotion. Except for the pubovaginalis, RM PFMs inserted onto caudal vertebrae, analogous to all tailed animals. Comparison of the PFM complex architecture across species revealed the lowest, thus closest to human, ADI for RM (1.9), followed by rat (2.0), mouse (2.6), and rabbit (4.7).

CONCLUSIONS: Overall, RM provides the closest architectural representation of human PFM complex among species examined; however, differences between individual PFMs should be taken into consideration. As RM is closely followed by rat with respect to PFM similarity with humans, this less-sentient and substantially cheaper model is a good alternative for PFM studies.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app