| 1. |
- Nilsson, Tobias S, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of two strategies for ex vivo lung perfusion
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1053-2498 .- 1557-3117. ; 37:2, s. 292-298
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2017 International Society for the Heart and Lung Transplantation. Background: Two clinically used strategies for ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) were compared in a porcine model with respect to lung function, metabolism, inflammatory response, oxidative stress, and cell viability. Methods: Porcine lungs (n = 20) were preserved, harvested, and kept cooled for 2 hours. After randomization, EVLP was performed using a cellular perfusate and open left atrium (COA group) or an acellular perfusate and a closed left atrium (ACA group). Oxygenation (partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen), compliance, dead space, weight, and perfusate oncotic pressure were registered before and after a 4-hour period of reconditioning. Lung tissue samples were collected before and after EVLP for quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis of gene expression for inflammatory markers, measurement of tissue hypoxia (hypoxia inducible factor-1α) and oxidative stress (ascorbyl radical), and viability (trypan blue staining) and lung histopathology. Results: In 3 of 10 lungs undergoing EVLP in the ACA group, EVLP was terminated prematurely because of severe lung edema and inability to perfuse the lungs. There were no significant differences in changes of lung oxygenation or pulmonary vascular resistance between groups. Compliance decreased and lung weights increased in both groups, but more in the ACA group (p = 0.083 and p = 0.065, respectively). There was no obvious difference in gene expression for hypoxia inducible factor-1α, inflammatory markers, free radicals, or lung injury between groups. Conclusions: Lung edema formation and decreased lung compliance occurs with both EVLP techniques but were more pronounced in the ACA group. Otherwise, there were no differences in lung function, inflammatory response, ischemia/reperfusion injury, or histopathologic changes between the EVLP techniques.
|
|
