A comparison of DigiGait™ and TreadScan™ imaging systems: assessment of pain using gait analysis in murine monoarthritis

Abstract

PurposeCarrageenan-induced arthritis is a painful acute arthritis model that is simple to induce, with peak pain and inflammation occurring at about 3 hours. This arthritis model can be evaluated using semiquantitative evoked or non-evoked pain scoring systems. These measures are subjective and are often time- and labor-intensive. It would be beneficial to utilize quantitative, nonsubjective evaluations of pain with rapid assessment tools. We sought to compare the DigiGait™ and TreadScan™ systems and to validate the two gait analysis platforms for detection of carrageenan-induced monoarthritis pain and analgesic response through changes in gait behavior.MethodsNon-arthritic mice and carrageenan-induced arthritic mice with and without analgesia were examined. A painful arthritic knee was produced by injection of 3% carrageenan into the knee joint of adult mice. Analgesic-treated mice were injected subcutaneously with 0.015 mg/mL (0.5 mg/kg) buprenorphine. Five-second videos were captured on the DigiGait™ or TreadScan™ system and, after calculating gait parameters, were compared using student’s unpaired t-test.ResultsWe found the DigiGait™ system consistently measured significantly longer stride measures (swing time, stance time, and stride time) than did TreadScan™. Both systems’ measures of variability were equal. Reproducibility was inconsistent on both systems. While both systems detected alterations in some gait measures after carrageenan injection, none of the alterations were seen with both systems. Only the TreadScan™ detected normalization of gait measures after analgesia, but the system could not detect normalization across all measures that altered due to arthritis pain. Time spent on analysis was dependent on operator experience.ConclusionNeither the DigiGait™ nor TreadScan™ system was useful for measuring changes in pain behaviors or analgesic responses in acute inflammatory monoarthritic mice.

Gait analysis methods for rodent models of arthritic disorders: reviews and recommendations

“…In a rat model of carrageenan-induced arthritis, the 5 parameters relating to the injured foot had opposite results when tested on the DigiGait versus TreadScan 32 . The authors suggest differences in chamber size, color, lighting, and treadmill belts may explain the variation; however, neither system provided acceptable reproducibility 32 . This highlights the importance of consistency and is a reminder that small methodological factors can play a large role in rodent gait analysis.…”

The progeroid gene BubR1 regulates axon myelination and motor function

“…As described previously [76, 77], gait parameters were measured using the Tread-Scan Gait Analysis System (Clever Sys, Reston, VA). Mice were started at 8 cm/s and treadmill speed was adjusted until each mouse maintained a consistent walking speed.…”

Automated Gait Analysis Through Hues and Areas (AGATHA): A Method to Characterize the Spatiotemporal Pattern of Rat Gait

“…Prior work has shown that significant methodological and material differences in gait analysis systems can yield inconsistent results when applied to identical rodent videos 10 . To be clear, methodological advantages in our approach were not examined relative to commercial systems, nor do we claim any advantage over these packages.…”

“…AGATHA, however, does provide an open-source platform which has been validated to manual digitization, and through which these methodological sources of variability can be examined. Unfortunately, little literature is devoted to assessing these methodological sources of error in rodent gait analysis platforms 10,23,32,46 . The limited number of system comparison studies is partly due to lack of gait system access, proprietary software protection, and testing bias.…”

“…However, commercial gait analysis systems are relatively expensive and their analysis software is typically proprietary and unalterable. Furthermore, these systems use different detection techniques which may not be suitable for all rodent models 10,23 . Moreover, many of these gait systems have not been validated to manual calculation of the gait pattern, hence the methodological errors in these techniques are not necessarily well understood.…”