| Literature DB >> 35057742 |
Liyu Shan1, Huan Chen1,2, Lifei Yang1, Zhe Feng1, Yue Wang1, Rongfeng Wang1, Nana Zhang1, Rongqian Wu1, Yi Lv3, Tao Ma4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although marginal donor livers expand the donor pool, an ideal method for quantitatively evaluating the quality of donor livers has not been developed. This study aimed to explore the feasibility of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging for estimating liver function in an ischemia-reperfusion model.Entities:
Keywords: Donor liver; Indocyanine green; Ischemia–reperfusion injury; Liver function assessment; Liver transplantation; Near-infrared fluorescence imaging
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35057742 PMCID: PMC8780761 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02103-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Fig. 1The experiment design
Fig. 2Surgical method and fluorescence curve analysis. a Method of establishing an ischemia–reperfusion model in rat liver. The hepatic artery was ligated with 6–0 silk sutures, and the portal vein was clamped with microvessel clips; b Fluorescence intensity curve. Fluorescence intensity first grew fast, then slowed, and finally reached a plateau phase; c We chose the asymptotic regression model to fit the fluorescence intensity curve. Parameter b3, which represents the growth rate of the FI curve, decreased from groups I-VII; d Group A included groups I and II, group B included groups III-V, and group C included groups VI-VIII. Parameter b3 was significantly different among groups A, B and C (P < 0.01)
Fig. 3ICG fluorescence imaging process. a 5 s after ICG injection; b 15 s after ICG injection; c 5 min after ICG injection; d 10 min after ICG injection; e 20 min after ICG injection; f 30 min after ICG injection
Suzuki’s histopathological scoring criteria
| Score | Congestion (%) | Vacuolar degeneration (%) | Necrosis (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | None | None | None |
| 1 | Very slight (10) | Very slight (10) | Single-cell necrosis |
| 2 | Slight (11–30) | Slight (11–30) | Slight (< 30) |
| 3 | Moderate (31–60) | Moderate (31–60) | Moderate (31–60) |
| 4 | Severe (> 60) | Severe (> 60) | Severe (> 60) |
Effect of different ischemia times on liver function (mean ± SD)
| Liver function | Control | Group | POD 1 | POD 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALT (U/L) | 83.26 ± 10.31 | A | I | 116.28 ± 14.43 | 84.34 ± 5.58 |
| II | 158.57 ± 26.48 | 73.22 ± 8.55 | |||
| B | III | 267.64 ± 39.82a | 56.27 ± 5.32a | ||
| IV | 345.47 ± 28.92b | 74.08 ± 18.04a | |||
| V | 418.18 ± 17.31b | 59.46 ± 3.68a | |||
| C | VI | 2038.33 ± 114.80c | 90.51 ± 18.41c | ||
| VII | 2585.46 ± 99.56d | 104.40 ± 8.00c | |||
| AST (U/L) | 163.92 ± 40.72 | A | I | 348.49 ± 34.50 | 121.99 ± 10.10 |
| II | 346.23 ± 36.88 | 129.85 ± 13.96 | |||
| B | III | 587.63 ± 16.13b | 114.34 ± 12.22 | ||
| IV | 652.02 ± 34.83b | 124.29 ± 9.84 | |||
| V | 1000.94 ± 77.29b | 140.45 ± 21.18 | |||
| C | VI | 2163.72 ± 33.70d | 222.83 ± 23.62c | ||
| VII | 2794.61 ± 177.41d | 239.03 ± 44.12c | |||
| DB (µmol/L) | 3.38 ± 0.92 | A | I | 3.40 ± 0.51 | 2.74 ± 0.50 |
| II | 4.01 ± 0.20 | 2.82 ± 0.15 | |||
| B | III | 4.88 ± 0.52 | 3.28 ± 0.11a | ||
| IV | 4.91 ± 0.08 | 3.33 ± 0.15a | |||
| V | 4.96 ± 0.35 | 3.62 ± 0.06b | |||
| C | VI | 4.92 ± 0.25 | 4.14 ± 0.24c | ||
| VII | 5.35 ± 0.63 | 4.99 ± 0.03d | |||
| TB (µmol/L) | 9.51 ± 0.29 | A | I | 8.43 ± 1.20 | 8.43 ± 1.20 |
| II | 6.98 ± 0.03 | 7.02 ± 0.12 | |||
| B | III | 10.75 ± 0.44b | 7.73 ± 0.24 | ||
| IV | 9.13 ± 1.00b | 9.26 ± 0.23b | |||
| V | 8.51 ± 0.29b | 9.47 ± 0.44 | |||
| C | VI | 11.44 ± 0.21d | 10.79 ± 0.92c | ||
| VII | 12.50 ± 0.19d | 12.06 ± 0.35c | |||
| LDH (U/L) | 733.18 ± 102.0 | A | I | 1421.22 ± 276.70 | 590.93 ± 14.68 |
| II | 1452.79 ± 324.34 | 736.05 ± 146.78 | |||
| B | III | 2341.30 ± 105.82 | 939.20 ± 43.17 | ||
| IV | 1471.21 ± 81.76 | 725.76 ± 154.91 | |||
| V | 1549.70 ± 163.10 | 953.03 ± 78.40 | |||
| C | VI | 1562.79 ± 55.89 | 1889.12 ± 96.55d | ||
| VII | 1938.16 ± 58.62d | 2392.23 ± 206.01d | |||
aP < 0.05
bP < 0.01 versus group A (I–II)
cP < 0.05
dP < 0.01 versus group B (III–V)
Fig. 4Histological examination of the liver on POD 1 and POD 7 among groups A, B and C; a–c Liver tissue on POD 1 in groups A-C; d–e Liver tissue on POD 7 in groups A-C
Fig. 5Suzuki’s scores among groups A, B and C were significantly different on POD 1. (P < 0.01)
Fig. 6The survival rate among the groups from POD 1 to POD 7. Seven rats in group C died in 7 days, and 4 of them died on POD 1. No death happened in the other groups