Large-for-size liver transplantation: a flowmetry study in pigs
Abstract Background Ischemia–reperfusion injury is partly responsible for morbidity in pediatric liver transplantation. Large-for-size (LFS) liver transplantation has not been fully studied in the pediatric population, and the effects of reperfusion injury may be underestimated. Materials and method...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of surgical research 2014-06, Vol.189 (2), p.313-320 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract Background Ischemia–reperfusion injury is partly responsible for morbidity in pediatric liver transplantation. Large-for-size (LFS) liver transplantation has not been fully studied in the pediatric population, and the effects of reperfusion injury may be underestimated. Materials and methods Thirteen Landrace–Large white pigs weighing 23 kg (range, 17–38 kg) underwent orthotopic liver transplantation. They were divided into two groups according to the size of the donor body: LFS and control (CTRL). After transplantation, the abdominal cavity of the recipient was kept open and portal venous flow (PVF) was measured after 1 h. The ratio of recipient PVF (PVFr) to donor PVF was used to establish correlations with ischemia and reperfusion parameters. Liver biopsies were taken 1 h after transplantation to assess ischemia and reperfusion and to quantify the gene expression of endothelial nitric oxide synthase, interleukin 6, BAX , and BCL. Results Recipient weight, total ischemia time, and warm ischemia time were similar between groups. Among hemodynamic and metabolic analyses, pH, central arteriovenous PCO2 difference, and AST were statistically worse in the LFS group than in the CTRL group. The same was found with endothelial nitric oxide synthase (0.41 ± 0.18 versus 1.56 ± 0.78; P = 0.02) and interleukin 6 (4.66 ± 4.61 versus 16.21 ± 8.25; P = 0.02). In the LFS group, a significant decay in the PVFr was observed in comparison with the CTRL group (0.93 ± 0.08 and 0.52 ± 0.11, respectively; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-4804 1095-8673 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jss.2014.03.018 |