Cargando…

Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the hepatic protective effect of both remote and local postconditioning (POS). METHODS: Twenty-eight Wistar rats were assigned into four groups: sham group(SHAM), ischemia-reperfusion group (IR), local ischemic POS group (lPOS) and remote ischemic POS gro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yasojima, Edson Yuzur, Domingues, Robson José de Souza, Silva, Renata Cunha, de Sousa, Luis Fernando Freitas, Trindade, Sérgio Cunha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7853697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33533826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/ACB360101
_version_ 1783646013923262464
author Yasojima, Edson Yuzur
Domingues, Robson José de Souza
Silva, Renata Cunha
de Sousa, Luis Fernando Freitas
Trindade, Sérgio Cunha
author_facet Yasojima, Edson Yuzur
Domingues, Robson José de Souza
Silva, Renata Cunha
de Sousa, Luis Fernando Freitas
Trindade, Sérgio Cunha
author_sort Yasojima, Edson Yuzur
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the hepatic protective effect of both remote and local postconditioning (POS). METHODS: Twenty-eight Wistar rats were assigned into four groups: sham group(SHAM), ischemia-reperfusion group (IR), local ischemic POS group (lPOS) and remote ischemic POS group (rPOS). Animals were subjected to liver ischemia for 30 min. Local ischemic POS group consisted of four cycles of 5 min liver ischemia, followed by 5 min reperfusion (40 min). Remote ischemic POS group consisted of four cycles of 5 min hind limb ischemia, followed by 5 min hind limb perfusion after the main liver ischemia period. After 190 minutes median and left liver lobes were harvested for biochemical and histopathology analysis. RESULTS: All the conditioning techniques were able to increase the level of bothglutathione reductase and peroxidase, showing higher values in the rPOS group when compared to the lPOS. Also, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances were higher in all intervention groups when compared to SHAM, but rPOS had the lower rates of increase, showing the best result. The histopathology analysis showed that all groups had worst injury levels than SHAM, but rPOS had lower degrees of damage when compared to the lPOS, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Remote postconditioning is a promising technique to reduce liver ischemia-reperfusion injury, once it increased antioxidants substances and reduced the damage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7853697
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78536972021-02-09 Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats Yasojima, Edson Yuzur Domingues, Robson José de Souza Silva, Renata Cunha de Sousa, Luis Fernando Freitas Trindade, Sérgio Cunha Acta Cir Bras Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the hepatic protective effect of both remote and local postconditioning (POS). METHODS: Twenty-eight Wistar rats were assigned into four groups: sham group(SHAM), ischemia-reperfusion group (IR), local ischemic POS group (lPOS) and remote ischemic POS group (rPOS). Animals were subjected to liver ischemia for 30 min. Local ischemic POS group consisted of four cycles of 5 min liver ischemia, followed by 5 min reperfusion (40 min). Remote ischemic POS group consisted of four cycles of 5 min hind limb ischemia, followed by 5 min hind limb perfusion after the main liver ischemia period. After 190 minutes median and left liver lobes were harvested for biochemical and histopathology analysis. RESULTS: All the conditioning techniques were able to increase the level of bothglutathione reductase and peroxidase, showing higher values in the rPOS group when compared to the lPOS. Also, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances were higher in all intervention groups when compared to SHAM, but rPOS had the lower rates of increase, showing the best result. The histopathology analysis showed that all groups had worst injury levels than SHAM, but rPOS had lower degrees of damage when compared to the lPOS, although it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Remote postconditioning is a promising technique to reduce liver ischemia-reperfusion injury, once it increased antioxidants substances and reduced the damage. Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia 2021-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7853697/ /pubmed/33533826 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/ACB360101 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Yasojima, Edson Yuzur
Domingues, Robson José de Souza
Silva, Renata Cunha
de Sousa, Luis Fernando Freitas
Trindade, Sérgio Cunha
Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title_full Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title_fullStr Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title_short Comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
title_sort comparison of remote and local postconditioning against hepatic ischemic-reperfusion injury in rats
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7853697/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33533826
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/ACB360101
work_keys_str_mv AT yasojimaedsonyuzur comparisonofremoteandlocalpostconditioningagainsthepaticischemicreperfusioninjuryinrats
AT dominguesrobsonjosedesouza comparisonofremoteandlocalpostconditioningagainsthepaticischemicreperfusioninjuryinrats
AT silvarenatacunha comparisonofremoteandlocalpostconditioningagainsthepaticischemicreperfusioninjuryinrats
AT desousaluisfernandofreitas comparisonofremoteandlocalpostconditioningagainsthepaticischemicreperfusioninjuryinrats
AT trindadesergiocunha comparisonofremoteandlocalpostconditioningagainsthepaticischemicreperfusioninjuryinrats