BACKGROUND & AIMS: Extended liver resection leads to hepatic failure because of a small remnant liver volume. Excessive parenchymal damage has been proposed as the principal cause of this failure, but little is known about the contribution of a primary deficiency in liver regeneration. We developed a mouse model to assess the regenerative capacity of a critically small liver remnant. METHODS: Extended (86%) hepatectomy (eHx) was modified to minimize collateral damage; effects were compared with those of standard (68%) partial hepatectomy (pHx) in mice. Markers of liver integrity and survival were evaluated after resection. Liver regeneration was assessed by weight gain, proliferative activity (analyses of Ki67, proliferating cell nuclear antigen, phosphorylated histone 3, mitosis, and ploidy), and regeneration-associated molecules. Knockout mice were used to study the role of p21. RESULTS: Compared with pHx, survival of mice was reduced after eHx, and associated with cholestasis and impaired liver function. However, no significant differences in hepatocyte death, sinusoidal injury, oxidative stress, or energy depletion were observed between mice after eHx or pHx. No defect in the initiation of hepatocyte proliferation was apparent. However, restoration of liver mass was delayed after eHx and associated with inadequate induction of Foxm1b and a p21-dependent delay in cell-cycle progression. In p21(-/-) mice, the cell cycle was restored, the gain in liver weight was accelerated, and survival improved after eHx. CONCLUSIONS: Significant parenchymal injury is not required for liver failure to develop after extended hepatectomy. Rather, liver dysfunction after eHx results from a transient, p21-dependent block before hepatocyte division. Therefore, a deficiency in cell-cycle progression causes liver failure after extended hepatectomy and can be overcome by inhibition of p21.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Extended liver resection leads to hepatic failure because of a small remnant liver volume. Excessive parenchymal damage has been proposed as the principal cause of this failure, but little is known about the contribution of a primary deficiency in liver regeneration. We developed a mouse model to assess the regenerative capacity of a critically small liver remnant. METHODS: Extended (86%) hepatectomy (eHx) was modified to minimize collateral damage; effects were compared with those of standard (68%) partial hepatectomy (pHx) in mice. Markers of liver integrity and survival were evaluated after resection. Liver regeneration was assessed by weight gain, proliferative activity (analyses of Ki67, proliferating cell nuclear antigen, phosphorylated histone 3, mitosis, and ploidy), and regeneration-associated molecules. Knockout mice were used to study the role of p21. RESULTS: Compared with pHx, survival of mice was reduced after eHx, and associated with cholestasis and impaired liver function. However, no significant differences in hepatocyte death, sinusoidal injury, oxidative stress, or energy depletion were observed between mice after eHx or pHx. No defect in the initiation of hepatocyte proliferation was apparent. However, restoration of liver mass was delayed after eHx and associated with inadequate induction of Foxm1b and a p21-dependent delay in cell-cycle progression. In p21(-/-) mice, the cell cycle was restored, the gain in liver weight was accelerated, and survival improved after eHx. CONCLUSIONS: Significant parenchymal injury is not required for liver failure to develop after extended hepatectomy. Rather, liver dysfunction after eHx results from a transient, p21-dependent block before hepatocyte division. Therefore, a deficiency in cell-cycle progression causes liver failure after extended hepatectomy and can be overcome by inhibition of p21.
Authors: P Studer; C G da Silva; J M Revuelta Cervantes; A Mele; E Csizmadia; J J Siracuse; S M Damrauer; C R Peterson; D Candinas; D M Stroka; A Ma; M Bhasin; C Ferran Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: Yuanxin Chen; Toshiyuki Hata; Fatima Rehman; Lu Kang; Liu Yang; Betty Y S Kim; Justin H Nguyen Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Jiansheng Huang; Andrew E Schriefer; Paul F Cliften; Dennis Dietzen; Sakil Kulkarni; Sucha Sing; Satdarshan P S Monga; David A Rudnick Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2016-01-06 Impact factor: 4.307