{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02666666666666667, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008888888888888889, 'mean_word_length': 4.926315789473684, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Comparation of Two Instruments for Rat Cervical 2 Hemisection Model


 The lateral C2 hemisection (HS) rat is the most studied reclinical model in the study of respiratory function after high cervical spinal cord injury. There are two main surgical methods in several studies— microscissors or microscalpel. This study is to evaluate the experimental results between those two methods. In this study, we performed rat lateral C2HS by microscissors (group A) or microscalpel (group B). We record cut frequency during hemisection as well as recovery of diaphragm electrophysiology by electromyogram (EMG) on the 14th day post injury. On the 14th day post injury, we record survival rate and evaluated the injury extent by hematoxylin-eosin (HE) stain. As a result, we found that group A had milder C2 injury extent than group B, higher survival rate on the 14th day post injury, and higher percent of peak root mean square (RMS) EMG post injury to that before injury. However, group A had larger cut frequency during hemisection. Weigh the advantages and disadvantages, microscissors seem had superiority over microscalpel.