| Literature DB >> 26880888 |
Mingxiao Guo1, Chunlei Lu1, Ying Gao1, Haifeng Zhang1, Dongfeng Chen1, Yousheng Li2.
Abstract
Background and Objectives. The intestinal mucosa is extremely sensitive to ischemia. Better intestinal preservation is the first step to improve the results of intestinal transplantation. The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of cold Lifor solution on preservation of swine small bowel. Methods. Swine ileum segments (200 cm) were allotransplanted heterotopically after 9-hour cold storage with UW solution (group 1, n = 6), with Lifor solution (group 2, n = 6), or without storage (group 3, n = 6), respectively. After cold storage, mucosal adenosine triphosphate (ATP) concentrations and histopathologic analysis after preservation were performed. At day 7 after the transplantation, intestinal absorptive function was also observed. Results. After 9 h cold preservation, pathological changes, the content of ATP in the intestinal mucosa, and the intestinal absorptive function after transplantation in group 2 were similar to those of group 1. Conclusion. The effect of cold storage of swine small bowel with Lifor solution is similar to that of UW solution. It may provide additional rationale for further exploration of Lifor as an alternative preservation solution in small bowel transplantation.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26880888 PMCID: PMC4737444 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3925751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract ISSN: 1687-6121 Impact factor: 2.260
Figure 1Morphologic changes of small bowel mucosa (HE ×100).
Figure 2Intestinal injury scores. (a) at the end of the preservation; (b) 1 h after ischemia-reperfusion; (c) day 7 after transplantation.
Figure 3Intestinal mucosal ATP concentration at the end of preservation ( p < 0.05 versus group 3; # p > 0.05 versus group 2).
Figure 4Maltose absorption test at day 7 after transplantation.
Maltose absorption test.
| Group | Time to the peak level (min) | Area under the curve |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 45 ± 3.87 | 2.62 ± 0.15 |
| 2 | 47.5 ± 4.61 | 2.73 ± 0.26 |
| 3 | 32.5 ± 2.5 | 3.83 ± 0.25 |
Note: p < 0.05 versus group 3; # p > 0.05 versus group 2.