$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Upon following this protocol, consistent and reproducible cervical hemi-contusive SCI is produced (Figure 5 & 6). The use of a vertebral stabilizer to stabilize the lateral processes of the same vertebra at the level intended for SCI allows for such satisfactory results. Using this method, not only the target C5 vertebra, but also adjacent C4 and C6 are rigidly fixed.
The NYU/MASCIS software provides a read-out with a graph set on an x and y-axis, and supports the use of our vertebral stabilization method, and equipment (Figure 6). This method of stabilization reduces injury variability that can result from the downward shifting of the target tissue and spinal column (Figure 1). Following injury, a clear unilateral bluish hematoma centered between the C5 and C6 DREZs is visible (Figure 5E). These injury parameters are consistent from animal to animal according to the readout provided by the NYU/MASCIS software (Figure 6).
As the cervical hemi-contusion produces clear forelimb deficits, this model is ideal for assessing forelimb functional abilities such as reaching, grooming13, and object manipulation18-19. As hindlimb motor deficits are less prominent, the Basso, Beattie and Bresnahan (BBB) locomotor scoring scale4 is not appropriate for use in this model. The functional outcome following injury is most noticeable in the ipsilateral forepaw extensor deficits, in which the rat exhibits a “clubbed” fist with all digits flexed18. All animals exposed to the same injury severity and level of the spinal cord should exhibit similar deficits to the ipsilateral forelimb illustrated in this protocol, upon correct injury. Animals improperly injured may present with very different manifestation and duration of the deficits13,18.
Histologically, this model produces extensive gray and white matter damage at the injury epicenter and rostral and caudal to the site of injury, leading to considerable lesion and cavity formation contained almost exclusively within the injured side of the spinal cord. A large, primarily astrocyte-based glial scar forms at the lesion borders with massive neuronal death18.

Figure 1: Illustration of spine flexibility during contusive SCI with different clamping methods. Figures A and B show flexibility or “yield” of the spine when spinous processes are clamped dorsally, allowing for improper impacts and inconsistent data. The illustration shown in A displays much more flexibility upon impact (red dashed line and large curved arrows) compared to that shown in B (smaller curved arrows), as the clamps are farther from the site of laminectomy and injury. Figure C shows lateral stabilization with our described device with the stabilizing arm securely tightened under the transverse process of the vertebra where the site of impact will be performed. There is no flexibility of the spine during this procedure, as the vertebra of interest is completely stabilized.

Figure 2: NYU/MASCIS impactor and custom stabilization container. Figure A displays the parts and features of the NYU/MASCIS spinal cord injury device, with multiple rod height settings for injury severity (inset). Figures B and C illustrate the U-shaped container that holds the rat, and the serrated stabilization arms that securely stabilize the vertebral column during surgery and injury (designed and produced by Y.P. Zhang).

Figure 3: Custom mounting system and lateral microadjuster on the NYU/MASCIS impactor. Figure A details the different components of the custom mounting system for the U-shaped rat stabilizer for spinal cord injury. Note the lateral microadjuster in figure A, crucial for precise alignment of the rat spinal cord for injury. Figures B and C provide further depiction of the stabilizer without (B) and with the U-shaped rat container (C) with respect to other important components of the injury device (mounting system designed and produced by Y.P. Zhang).

Figure 4: Measurements of the individual components of the surgical stabilization device and attachments. Each component of the custom stabilization system is highlighted to show the dimensions and scale (A, C, and D). Thoracic stabilization arms (B) are shown to display the potential application of this device for use in different spinal surgical models.

Figure 5: Surgical landmarks and preparation for cervical hemi-contusion spinal cord injury. Figures A and B portray the correct landmarks for proper impact alignment on the exposed rat spinal cord. The appropriate impact point is directly between the C5 and C6 dorsal nerve roots (rostral-caudal) and the midline and lateral edges of the spinal cord (B). Figures C-E show, in higher magnification, the process of exposing the desired half of the cervical spinal cord for injury, through careful unilateral laminectomy. Also, figures D and E demonstrate the cord immediately before and after spinal cord contusion injury. Note the visible hemorrhage (E) caused by the impact (black arrow).

Figure 6:. Examples of acceptable versus unacceptable data readouts following impact with the NYU/MASCIS impactor. The top graph (A) and top data set (C) illustrate a readout of a very good impact, with data measurements of “% error” for impact rod velocity, initial height, and starting time, as indicated with the red arrow and underline. All values fall well within the window of acceptable error. Conversely, the bottom panel demonstrates data produced by an improper impact caused by improper stabilization of the spinal column (B) and error during “zeroing” of the impactor rod and tip onto the spinal cord surface, prior to setting the height of the impactor rod (C). Note the considerable error indicated for the initial height and start time of the impactor drop, as indicated by the red arrow and underline. The software also provides a warning that error has been detected for these parameters (bottom of panel C).