| Literature DB >> 33733319 |
Dieter Paul Hoyer1, Sandra Swoboda2, Juergen Walter Treckmann2, Tamas Benkö2, Andreas Paul2, Nahal Brocke-Ahmadinejad3.
Abstract
Machine perfusion by controlled oxygenated rewarming (COR) is feasible and safe in clinical application and result in a promising outcome. This study utilizes next-generation sequencing (NGS) to investigate the transcriptome of human liver tissue undergoing COR before liver transplantation. Cold-stored livers were subjected to machine-assisted slow COR for ~120 min before transplantation. Biopsies were taken before (preCOR) and after COR (postCOR) and 1 h after reperfusion (postRep). The samples were sequenced, using RNA-seq to analyze differential transcriptional changes between the different stages and treatments of the grafts. Comparison of differential gene expression preCOR and postCOR demonstrated 10 upregulated genes. postRep 97 and 178 genes were upregulated and 7 and 13 downregulated compared to preCOR and postCOR, respectively. A shift of gene expressions by machine perfusion to the TGF-beta pathway was observed. The present study demonstrates distinct transcriptome profiles associated with machine perfusion by COR and transplantation of human livers. Such data provide a deeper understanding of the molecular mechanisms of machine perfusion technology in human liver transplantation.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical transplantation; Controlled oxygenated rewarming; Next-generation sequencing; Organ preservation; Reperfusion injury
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33733319 PMCID: PMC8298250 DOI: 10.1007/s10142-021-00781-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Funct Integr Genomics ISSN: 1438-793X Impact factor: 3.410
Clinical characteristics of donors, recipients and transplantation procedures
| Donor gender M/F (% of male) | 4/1 (80) |
| Donor age, median (range) | 60 (50–71) |
| Donor BMI, mean ± SD | 28.3 (±1.7) |
| ICU-stay, days (median and range) | 3 (1–6) |
| Steatosis macrovesicular | 5 (0–15) |
| Steatosis microvesicular | 10 (0–70) |
| CIT | 524 (423–870) |
| DRI | 2.03 (1.6–2.5) |
| Perfusion time, min (range) | 138 (93–153) |
| WIT | 27 (20–28) |
| Recipient gender M/F (% of male) | 3/2 (60) |
| Recipient age, median (range) | 64 (44–65) |
| Recipient LabMELD score at transplantation | 15 (10–23) |
| ICU stay, days (median and range) | 4 (2–11) |
| Graft survival at 1 year | 100% |
| Recipient survival at 1 year | 100% |
| In-house/30-day mortality (%) | 0 |
Fig. 1a Method outline. b Number of significantly up- and downregulated transcripts
Fig. 2MA and Volcano plots of comparisons postRep vs preCOR and postRep vs postCOR. Overlap of significantly regulated transcripts between the two comparisons as Venn diagram
Fig. 3Differential expression postRep vs postCOR. a Network of differentially expressed biological processes. b Network of differentially expressed molecular functions
Fig. 4Differential expression postRep vs preCOR. a Network of differentially expressed biological processes. b Network of differentially expressed molecular functions