Galvao, FHF

Kobayashi, Y

Murase, N

Nomoto, M

Starzl, TE

Takeyoshi, I

Todo, S

English

PubMed

D-Scholarship@Pitt

Influence of Graft Perfusion Pressure on Graft Viability After Small Bowel Preservation and Transplantation Y. Kobayashi, F.H.F. Galv8o, M. Nomoto, N. Murase, I. Takeyoshi, T.E. Starzl, and S. Todo THERE have been conflicting reports on the effective-ness of University of Wisconsin (UW) solution for experimental small bowel preservation.1- 4 The source of variation in these conflicting studies may be technical differences in the perfusion of UW solution through the graft. Inadequate graft perfusion may cause destruction of the microcirculation and destruction of cellular integrity. In this study, we evaluated the role of graft perfusion on graft viability and outcome after syngeneic small bowel trans-plantation in rats. MATERIALS AND METHODS Orthotopic functional small bowel transplantation was performed using Lewis rats.s Grafts were perfused with 10 mL of UW solution using a Harvard pump under either under low (Lw) or high (Hi) pressure. After perfusion, the grafts were either transplanted immediately [0 hours] (n = 10) or transplanted after 12 hours of cold preservation (n = 12). Tissue samples were taken from both the ileum and jejunum at the end of preservation. 1 hour after reperfusion. and at sacrifice for electrophysioiogic (Ussing cham-ber) and histologic assessment. Electrophysiologically, potential ditference. shon circuit current, and resistance were measured to assess basal function, and glucose stimulation and theophylline stimulation were measured to assess enterocyte and crypt cell function. Histology samples were scored using Park's classification (Grade 0-8).6 RESULTS Thirty-day animal survival of the immediate high pressure group (Hi-O) and the immediate low pressure group (Lw-O) were similar (100% versus 90%), but survival in the Hi-12 group was significantly better than the Lw-12 group (66.7% versus 16.7%). Histologic and electrolophysiologic studies at the end of preservation and 1 hour after reperfusion showed that graft function and morphology were signifi-cantly better preserved in the Hi-12 group than in the Lw-12 group for both the ileum and jejunum (Table 1). While the ileum tended to show more damage than the jejunum in the low pressure group, graft function and morphology of the ileum was similar to the jejunum in the high pressure group. DISCUSSION UW solution has been shown to be superior to other preservation solutions for extended organ preservation. However, neither the maximum cold ischemia time nor optimum preservation conditions have been clearly defined for the small bowel. Because UW solution has a higher viscosity than other conventional preservation solutions, the problem of inadequate perfusion may occur if perfusion pressure is not sufficient. Our results show that high perfu-sion pressure is needed to obtain better graft viability, graft function, and morphology after prolonged preservation. The improved outcome of the high pressure grafts corre-lated with the protection of crypt cell function and mor-phology. Our results suggest that graft viability and integrity are well maintained after 12 hours of preservation using high pressure perfusion of the graft with UW solution. Our From the Pittsburgh Transplantation Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Address reprint requests to Satoru Todo, 5C Falk Clinic, 3601 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. © 1996 by Appleton & Lange 0041-1345/96/$3.00/ + 0 Table 1. Electrophysiologlc and Pathologic Result In 12-Hour Preservation Model Base PO Base Isc Base R Glu-Isc Theo-Isc 12-Hour End Preservation Period [End-12) Jej Hi 0.63:t 0.14· 10.94 :t 1 .40" 85.12 ::: 6.99" 5.72::: 0.66· 13.80::: 3.16" Lw 0.22 :t 0.05 3.65:t 0.66 61.23::: 6.46 2.08::: 0.52 5.47::: 1.38 lie Hi 0.67::: 0.08· 11.72:t 1.47" 61.65 :t 2.75· 7.29::: 1.74· 20.57 ::: 3.06· Lw 0.28:t 0.07 5.21 ::: 1.12 45.23::: 5.11 1.04::: 0.66 1.30 ::: 1.02 1 Hour After Reperfusion Period (Rep-12) Jej Hi 0.17::: 0.06· 6.51 :t 1.17" 34.56 ::: 2.80· 2.87::: 1.36 16.41 ::: 5.13' Lw 0.02 :t 0.02 2.87 :t 0.48 20.27::: 2.57 0.26::: 0.26 3.13::: 1.40 lie Hi 0.38 :t 0.08· 9.54::: 2.63· 40.11 ::: 4.34· 1.30::: 0.48 19.97 ::: 3.06· Lw 0.05::: 0.04 0.78::: 1.19 24.96::: 3.78 0.31 ::: 0.31 1.30::: 1.02 ElectrophyslologiC results were expressed by mean:!: SE. PO: (mV). Isc: (mA/cm'). R: (II' cmo). P.O: potential diWerence. Isc: short Circuit current. R: resistance. Glu-Isc: glucose stlmulatoon ISC. Theo-Isc: theophylline stimulation isc PathologiC Grading followed by Park's claSSification . • p < .05 versus Lw Group. Path Grade 1,1,1,1,1,1· 1. 1, 2. 2, 3, 4 1,1,1,1,1,1· 1, 1, 2, 3, 3. 4 3,4,4.4,5.6 4. 5, 5. 5, 6. 6 4, 5. 5, 5, 5. 6 4,6,6.6,6.6 2598 Transplantation ProCeedings, Vol 28. No 5 (October). 1996: pp 2598-2599 EFFECT OF GRAFT PERFUSION ON GRAFT VIABILITY results also suggest that differences in perfusion pressure may account for the conflicting results on the effectiveness of UW solution for experimental small bowel preservation. REFERENCES 1. Fabian MA, Bollinger RR, Wyble CW, et al: Transplantation 52:794, 1991 2599 2. Burgmann H. Reckendorfer H. Sperlich M, et al: Eur Surg Res 24:84, 1992 3. Taguchi T, Zorychta E. Guttman FM: Transplantation 53: 1202, 1992 4. Thaler W, Oberhuber G, Klima G. et al: Eur Surg Res 25:181, 1993 5. Murase N, Demetris J, et al: Surgery 110:87. 1991 6. Park PO, Haglund U, Bulkley GB, et al: Surgery 107:574, 1990 

Influence of graft perfusion pressure on graft viability after small bowel preservation and transplantation

Name not available

http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/5329/1/31735062134006.pdf

Influence of graft perfusion pressure on graft viability after small bowel preservation and transplantation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

D-Scholarship@Pitt

Name not available

Name not available