Portal vein embolization versus dual vein embolization for management of the future liver remnant in patients undergoing major hepatectomy: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to compare progression to surgery, extent of liver hypertrophy, and postoperative outcomes in patients planned for major hepatectomy following either portal vein embolization (PVE) or dual vein embolization (DVE) for management of an inadequate future liver remnant (FLR). METHODS: An electronic search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed databases using both medical subject headings (MeSH) and truncated word searches. Articles comparing PVE with DVE up to January 2022 were included. Articles comparing sequential DVE were excluded. ORs, risk ratios, and mean difference (MD) were calculated using fixed and random-effects models for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight retrospective studies including 523 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics between the groups, specifically, age, sex, BMI, indication for resection, and baseline FLR (ml and per cent) were comparable. The percentage increase in hypertrophy was larger in the DVE group, 66 per cent in the DVE group versus 27 per cent in the PVE group, MD 39.07 (9.09, 69.05) (P = 0.010). Significantly fewer patients failed to progress to surgery in the DVE group than the PVE group, 13 per cent versus 25 per cent respectively OR 0.53 (0.31, 0.90) (P = 0.020). Rates of post-hepatectomy liver failure 13 per cent versus 22 per cent (P = 0.130) and major complications 20 per cent versus 28 per cent (Clavien–Dindo more than IIIa) (P = 0.280) were lower. Perioperative mortality was lower with DVE, 1 per cent versus 10 per cent (P = 0.010). CONCLUSION: DVE seems to produce a greater degree of hypertrophy of the FLR than PVE alone which translates into more patients progressing to surgery. Higher quality studies are needed to confirm these results

Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells Prolong Survival and Ameliorate Motor Deficit through Trophic Support in Huntington's Disease Mouse Models

We investigated the therapeutic potential of human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hBM-MSCs) in Huntington's disease (HD) mouse models. Ten weeks after intrastriatal injection of quinolinic acid (QA), mice that received hBM-MSC transplantation showed a significant reduction in motor function impairment and increased survival rate. Transplanted hBM-MSCs were capable of survival, and inducing neural proliferation and differentiation in the QA-lesioned striatum. In addition, the transplanted hBM-MSCs induced microglia, neuroblasts and bone marrow-derived cells to migrate into the QA-lesioned region. Similar results were obtained in R6/2-J2, a genetically-modified animal model of HD, except for the improvement of motor function. After hBM-MSC transplantation, the transplanted hBM-MSCs may integrate with the host cells and increase the levels of laminin, Von Willebrand Factor (VWF), stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1), and the SDF-1 receptor Cxcr4. The p-Erk1/2 expression was increased while Bax and caspase-3 levels were decreased after hBM-MSC transplantation suggesting that the reduced level of apoptosis after hBM-MSC transplantation was of benefit to the QA-lesioned mice. Our data suggest that hBM-MSCs have neural differentiation improvement potential, neurotrophic support capability and an anti-apoptotic effect, and may be a feasible candidate for HD therapy

DNA damage by lipid peroxidation products: implications in cancer, inflammation and autoimmunity

Oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation (LPO) induced by inflammation, excess metal storage and excess caloric intake cause generalized DNA damage, producing genotoxic and mutagenic effects. The consequent deregulation of cell homeostasis is implicated in the pathogenesis of a number of malignancies and degenerative diseases. Reactive aldehydes produced by LPO, such as malondialdehyde, acrolein, crotonaldehyde and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, react with DNA bases, generating promutagenic exocyclic DNA adducts, which likely contribute to the mutagenic and carcinogenic effects associated with oxidative stress-induced LPO. However, reactive aldehydes, when added to tumor cells, can exert an anticancerous effect. They act, analogously to other chemotherapeutic drugs, by forming DNA adducts and, in this way, they drive the tumor cells toward apoptosis. The aldehyde-DNA adducts, which can be observed during inflammation, play an important role by inducing epigenetic changes which, in turn, can modulate the inflammatory process. The pathogenic role of the adducts formed by the products of LPO with biological macromolecules in the breaking of immunological tolerance to self antigens and in the development of autoimmunity has been supported by a wealth of evidence. The instrumental role of the adducts of reactive LPO products with self protein antigens in the sensitization of autoreactive cells to the respective unmodified proteins and in the intermolecular spreading of the autoimmune responses to aldehyde-modified and native DNA is well documented. In contrast, further investigation is required in order to establish whether the formation of adducts of LPO products with DNA might incite substantial immune responsivity and might be instrumental for the spreading of the immunological responses from aldehyde-modified DNA to native DNA and similarly modified, unmodified and/or structurally analogous self protein antigens, thus leading to autoimmunity

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field