The described double-hit method to cause a severe lung injury in pigs is suitable to study different treatment options in ARDS. The double-hit model mimics two central elements of the pathomechanism of ARDS: loss of the alveolar-capillary unit and disruption of the endothelial barrier7. Due to the two hits, it is important to have a study protocol with predefined target values (e.g., PaO2/FiO2-ratio).
The main disadvantage of this double-hit method is the difficulty to determine the extent to which the lung injury is caused by the balanced electrolyte solution lavage, the oleic acid infusion or both. This is a common problem in other combined lung injury models as described (e.g., for a lavage and mechanical-ventilation-hit method3). Furthermore, the oleic acid method was first described to investigate the mechanism of acute lung injury caused by fat/lipid embolism8. Oleic acid is insoluble in water and must be emulsified in blood continuously. After injection of repeated doses of oleic acid, severe hemodynamic changes such as myocardial depression, systemic hypotension and pulmonary hypertension can occur immediately and result in right ventricular failure3,6,9. Right ventricular failure can lead to sudden death of the animal. During the study, two animals were lost due to the described effects. The surfactant depletion by instillation of warmed balanced electrolyte solution was first developed by Lachmann10. Human ARDS is often associated with the depletion of surfactant from the alveoli3. In animal models, repeated instillations of balanced electrolyte solution must be performed. At first, hypoxemia is reached very fast, but rapidly reversible under mechanical ventilation3. The permeability and inflammation are not significantly affected and triggered by balanced electrolyte solution3. Inflammatory changes (e.g., neutrophilic alveolitis) occur after about 4 h. The major disadvantage of using balanced electrolyte solution is that the animals require intubation, mechanical ventilation and general anesthesia3.
Overall, there are also some major advantages when using and combining both methods in pigs. Lung injury caused by oleic acid infusion is well known and has been described in detail before3,6. Kamuf et al. reported reproducible results in small and large animals and hence presented a well-suited model for studying ARDS6. Oleic acid is directly toxic to the endothelial cells3. Endothelial injury is followed by increased pulmonary microvascular permeability and intrapulmonary shunt3. Severe problems in the gas exchange can occur3. Oleic acid infusion does not only mimic the early phase of ARDS, it also reproduces the later pathophysiological changes with deposition of fibrin on the alveolar surface. Bronchoalveolar lavage is a common model to induce lung injury and is well established11. The histopathological findings in human ARDS (e.g., atelectasis and perivascular edema) can be caused by repeated lavages11. Oleic acid infusion leads to profound alveolar necrosis, congestion and edema formation, whereas bronchoalveolar lavage induces more barotrauma, atelectasis and haemorrhage9.
With this double-hit model, different ventilation strategies, specific therapeutic approaches and the investigation of pulmonary changes and lung function in ARDS can be investigated. Combining these two methods result in an ARDS model closer mimicking the pathophysiological changes occurring during human ARDS. The instrumentation and the extended monitoring of the pigs are easier to perform in large animals and are more similar to the bedside setting in the intensive care unit. In summary, this model is highly reproducible and allows further research to investigate different therapeutic approaches for the treatment of ARDS in a more realistic setting.