Celsior液与UW液对无心跳大鼠供肝保存效果的比较

目的 比较Celsior(CS)液与UW液对大鼠无心跳供者(NHBD)供肝的保存效果.方法 选取健康雄性SD大鼠作为肝移植的供、受者.通过阻断大鼠主动脉和膈上下腔静脉10 min的方法,制备和获取NHBD供肝,并采用不同的器官保存液灌注和冷保存供肝.随机将受者分为4组.CS8 h组:受者采用经CS液灌注和冷保存8 h的供肝移植;UW8 h组:受者采用经UW液灌注和冷保存8 h的供肝移植;CS16 h组:受者采用经CS液灌注和冷保存16 h的供肝移植;UW16 h组:受者采用经UW液灌注和冷保存16 h的供肝移植.受者门静脉开放前、开放后1、3及6 h,取各组受者的静脉血检测血清丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT)、天冬氨酸转氨酶(AST)、内皮素1(ET-1)、白细胞介素1(IL-1)及肿瘤坏死因子α(TNF-α)水平;观察和比较各组受者的胆汁生成量、移植肝组织病理学改变及术后7 d内的存活率.结果 NHBD供肝经UW液灌注后呈"花斑"状,肝叶边缘灌注不良,经CS液灌注后肝叶边缘灌注良好.CS8 h组和UW8 h组受者的胆汁生成量分别为(0.21±0.01)ml和(0.10±0.02)ml(P<0.05).门静脉开放后1、3及6 h,CS8 h组受者的血清ALT及AST水平明显低于UW8 h组(P<0.05),门静脉开放后1、3h,CS8 h组受者的血清ET-1、IL-1及TNF-α水平均明显低于UW8 h组(P<0.05);CS8 h组受者移植肝肝窦扩张、门静脉充血及炎症细胞浸润等病理学改变明显轻于UW8 h组,CS8 h组和UW8 h组受者术后7 d的存活率分别为58.3%和25.0%(P<0.05).CS16 h组和UW16 h组受者各时点的胆汁分泌量、血清ALT、AST、ET-1、IL-1及TNF-α水平的比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组受者均在术后3 d内死亡,两组受者移植肝组织病理学改变无明显差异.结论 CS液对大鼠NHBD供肝的保存效果优于UW液,这可能与UW液较CS液粘稠及CS液能够减少枯否细胞的激活有关;NHBD供肝的冷保存时间不宜超过16 h.     

微通道经皮肾镜联合输尿管软镜与否治疗复杂肾结石的Meta分析

目的 系统性评价微通道经皮肾镜联合输尿管软镜碎石取石术治疗复杂肾结石的疗效和安全性。方法 系统性检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase、CNKI、VIP、CBM和WanFang Data数据库,搜集建库至2020年5月1日关于比较微通道经皮肾镜取石术联合输尿管软镜碎石术(联合组)和单行微通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术(非联合组)治疗复杂肾结石的随机对照试验。采用RevMan 5.2软件和Stata 12.0软件进行Meta分析。结果 共纳入13个随机对照试验,包括1 198例患者。Meta分析结果显示:联合组一期结石清除率[RR=1.23,95%CI(1.17,1.30),P0.001]高于非联合组;联合组在术中出血量[MD=–29.81,95%CI(–46.94,–12.69),P=0.0006]、住院时间[MD=–1.09,95%CI(–1.67,–0.51),P=0.0002]、术后出血率[RR=0.24,95%CI(0.10,0.55),P=0.0007]和总体并发症发生率[RR=0.30,95%CI(0.18,0.49),P0.001]均低于非联合组;而在手术时间、术后感染率和术后发热率差异均无统计学意义。结论 对于复杂肾结石的治疗,联合组较非联合组,能够提高结石清除率,降低术中出血量、住院时间、术后出血和总体并发症发生率,且不增加手术时间、术后感染和术后发热率。     

腹腔镜辅助与传统开放胃癌根治术治疗老年胃癌患者安全性及疗效比较的meta分析

目的系统评价腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术(LAG)与传统开放胃癌根治术(COG)治疗老年胃癌患者的安全性及疗效。方法计算机检索Pubmed、EMBASE、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方数据库及维普数据库中的有关LAG与COG治疗老年胃癌患者疗效比较的文献,采用Rev Man 5.2软件行meta分析。结果最终纳入10篇病例对照研究,累计样本量为1 522例,其中观察组757例,对照组765例。meta分析结果显示:对于老年胃癌患者,与COG比较,LAG的术中出血量少[MD=–121.12,95%CI为(–179.93,–62.31),P0.000 1],术中淋巴结清扫数量多[MD=1.62,95%CI为(0.60,2.65),P=0.002],术后首次下床活动时间[SMD=–2.58,95%CI为(–4.58,–0.58),P=0.01]、术后肠道功能恢复时间[SMD=–0.85,95%CI为(–1.20,–0.51),P0.000 01]和术后首次经口进食时间[MD=–0.90,95%CI为(–1.27,–0.52),P0.000 01]早,术后住院时间短[MD=–4.03,95%CI为(–5.62,–2.44),P0.000 01],术后总体并发症发生率[OR=0.49,95%CI为(0.38,0.64),P0.000 01]、手术相关并发症发生率[OR=0.54,95%CI为(0.39,0.74),P=0.000 1]、切口并发症发生率[OR=0.42,95%CI为(0.22,0.81),P=0.010]及呼吸系统并发症发生率[OR=0.60,95%CI为(0.38,0.95),P=0.03]均较低,但2组患者的手术时间[MD=8.36,95%CI为(–10.97,27.69),P=0.40]和术后吻合口漏发生率[OR=0.60,95%CI为(0.27,1.31),P=0.20]比较差异均无统计学意义。结论对老年胃癌患者,LAG与COG同样安全及可行,且LAG在减少术中出血量及保证术中淋巴结清扫数量方面具有明显优势,具有创伤小、术后住院时间短、术后总体并发症发生率低等近期疗效优势。     

经腹壁引流与经会阴部引流对直肠癌患者术后恢复影响的meta分析

目的探讨经腹壁引流与经会阴部引流对直肠癌患者术后恢复的影响。方法计算机检索Pub Med、中国生物医学数据库(CBM)、CNKI全文数据库、万方数据库以及维普科技期刊数据库发表的比较经腹壁引流与经会阴部引流对直肠癌患者术后恢复影响的一次文献(随机对照试验),检索时间为2006年1月至2016年1月。采用Rev Man 5.2软件进行meta分析。结果 meta分析结果表明:在术后引流方面,腹壁引流组与会阴部引流组的术后持续引流时间[MD=–0.03,95%CI为(–1.63,1.57),P=0.97]、术后引流液总量[MD=–9.53,95%CI为(–104.95,85.90),P=0.84]及术后拔管时间[MD=0.25,95%CI为(–0.31,0.82),P=0.38]比较差异均不具有统计学意义;在术后感染方面,与会阴部引流组相比,腹壁引流组的引流管切口处皮肤感染率较低[OR=0.32,95%CI为(0.21,0.48),P0.000 01],但2组的腹部切口感染率[OR=0.84,95%CI为(0.51,1.36),P=0.48]和盆腔感染率[OR=0.77,95%CI为(0.52,1.15),P=0.20]比较差异均无统计学意义;在其他指标方面,与会阴部引流组相比,腹壁引流组的引流管切口处皮肤疼痛的时间较短[MD=–5.07,95%CI为(–6.96,–3.17),P0.000 01];而2组的术后住院时间[MD=0.82,95%CI为(–0.39,2.03),P=0.19]、吻合口出血发生率[OR=0.95,95%CI为(0.58,1.54),P=0.82]以及吻合口漏发生率[OR=1.33,95%CI为(0.93,1.92),P=0.12]比较差异均无统计学意义。结论经腹壁留置盆腔引流管较经会阴部留置盆腔引流管可能更有利于降低引流管切口处皮肤感染率,并缩短引流管切口处皮肤疼痛的时间,从而更好地促进患者术后康复。     

胸腔镜与开胸手术治疗胸部创伤疗效比较的Meta分析

目的:比较胸腔镜与开胸手术治疗胸部创伤的临床疗效。方法:检索Pubmed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、中国知网、维普数据库及万方数据库收集关于胸腔镜与开胸手术治疗胸部创伤疗效比较的随机对照研究。利用Cochrane系统评价员手册5.1版偏倚风险评估标准进对研究质量进行评价,使用Rev Man 5.3软件进行统计分析。结果:共纳入研究27项,患者2210例。Meta分析显示胸腔镜组患者术后的并发症发生率显著低于开胸手术组(RR值0.47(95%CI:0.33–0.65),P0.001),且两组患者术后死亡率无明显差异[RR值0.82(95%CI:0.24–2.79),P=0.75]。胸腔镜组患者术中出血量[合并MD值–100.39 mL(95%CI:–103.06至–97.72),P0.001]、手术时间[合并MD值为–15.56 min(95%CI:–16.60至–14.56),P0.001]、术后引流量[合并MD值–150.19 mL(95%CI:–188.71至–111.67),P0.001]、术后置管引流时间[合并MD值–1.64 d(95%CI:–1.75至–1.52),P0.001]及住院时间[合并MD值–4.61 d(95%CI:–5.23至–3.99),P0.001]均显著低于传统开胸手术组患者。结论:胸腔镜是一种安全有效的治疗胸部创伤的手段。     

不同胆道灌洗方法对大鼠肝内胆管冷保存再灌注损伤的影响

目的观察不同胆道灌洗方法对大鼠移植肝肝内胆管冷保存再灌注损伤的影响。方法应用大鼠原位肝移植模型，将88只SD大鼠随机分为假手术组、胆道非灌洗组、UW液胆道灌洗组、生理盐水（NS）胆道灌洗＋UW液肝内胆道灌注保存组、HTK液胆道灌洗＋UW液肝内胆道灌注保存组、HTK液胆道灌洗＋HTK液肝内胆道灌注保存组。移植肝置于4℃林格液中保存2h后行原位肝移植。移植肝再灌注后24h，检测血清总胆红素（TB）、直接胆红素（DB）、碱性磷酸酶（AKP）、γ-谷酰转肽酶（GGT）及胆汁中GGT、葡萄糖（Glu）含量。在光镜及电镜下观察肝内胆管上皮细胞的形态学变化。结果与非灌洗组比较，胆道灌洗组术后各项指标明显改善（P〈0．01）；HTK液及NS灌洗组较UW液灌洗组术后指标改善明显（P〈0．05）。病理检测发现非灌洗组胆道损伤明显，各灌洗组胆道损伤程度明显改善，HTK液灌洗＋UW或HTK液灌注组对胆管上皮细胞的损伤较轻。结论移植肝冷保存前进行胆道灌洗可以明显减轻胆管上皮细胞的损伤，4℃HTK液灌洗＋4℃UW或HTK液灌注保存效果比较理想。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术后放置腹腔引流随机对照试验的Meta分析

目的:系统评价腹腔镜胆囊切除术后腹腔内引流的有效性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane对照试验中心登记册及Cochrane图书馆(2018年11期)、CBM、CNKI、VIP等数据库。系统评价根据PRISMA指南进行,并采用固定与随机效应模型进行Meta分析。结果:共22项研究涉及3 866例患者的RCTs(其中引流组2 003例,非引流组1 863例)纳入研究。Meta分析结果显示,两组腹腔内液体发生率[RR=1.26,95%CI(0.92,1.72),P=0.16]、术后死亡率[RR=0.44,95%CI(0.04,4.72),P=0.50]差异无统计学意义。术后放置腹腔引流未能降低恶心或/和呕吐的总体发生率[RR=1.16,95%CI(0.95,1.42),P=0.15]、肩部疼痛发生率[RR=0.93,95%CI(0.71,1.23),P=0.62]。引流组具有更高的疼痛评分(通过视觉模拟评分测量)[MD=1.00,95%CI(0.58,1.42),P<0.00001],更长的手术时间[MD=6.07,95%CI(2.07,10.08),P=0.003]、术后住院时间[MD=0.73,95%CI(0.29,1.17),P=0.001]。切口感染与放置腹腔引流无关[RR=1.61,95%CI(0.97,2.69),P=0.07]。结论:腹腔镜胆囊切除术术毕放置引流管并无明显优势,腹腔引流的常规使用似乎具有不利的临床结果,对于这种措施应重新考虑。     

Celsior液和UW液保存供肝的前瞻性随机对照研究

目的比较Celsior液和UW液保存供肝的效果。方法随机选取拟行肝移植的患者60例，平均分为两组，一组接受以Celsior液灌洗和冷保存的供肝（Celsior液组）移植，另一组接受以UW液灌洗和冷保存的供肝（UW液组）移植，两组在患者年龄、性别构成、肝功能分级以及原发病、肝移植术式等方面的差异无统计学意义。比较两组供肝组织学变化、术后早期肝功能恢复情况及术后3个月内缺血性胆道狭窄的发生率。结果Celsior液组供肝冷缺血时间为（8．83±1．53）h，UW液组为（9．08±1．85）h，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组术后早期血清丙氨酸转氨酶、天冬氨酸转氨酶、γ-谷氨酰转移酶、胆红素总量、出血时间及胆汁量的差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），术后3个月内，Celsior液组缺血性胆道狭窄发生率为6．7％（2／30），UW液组为13．3％（4／30），差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组移植肝的组织学改变相似。结论在冷缺血时间一致的情况下，Celsior液保存供肝的效果与UW液相同。     

单孔法与多孔法胸腔镜下肺叶切除术治疗非小细胞肺癌疗效的系统评价与Meta分析

目的对单孔法与多孔法胸腔镜下肺叶切除术两种术式治疗非小细胞肺癌的有效性及安全性进行系统评价。方法通过计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、The Cochrane Library、CBM、知网、万方、维普以及Web of Science等数据库,检索时间由其建库至2018年8月。筛选文献、提取资料以及评价偏倚风险由两名研究员独立完成,并对所采集数据使用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果本文共纳入11篇研究(4篇随机对照研究,1篇前瞻性队列研究,6篇回顾性队列研究),共计1 574例患者,其中单孔法组779例,多孔法组795例。Meta分析结果显示:两组在手术时间[MD=3.60,95%CI(–8.59,15.79),P=0.56]、术中中转率[OR=1.06,95%CI(0.54,2.06),P=0.87]、术后住院时间[MD=0.74,95%CI(–1.60,0.12),P=0.09]、术后并发症发生率[OR=0.76,95%CI(0.53,1.10),P=0.15]、术后引流时间[MD=0.63,95%CI(–1.28,0.02),P=0.06]、清扫淋巴结数[MD=–0.11,95%CI(–0.46,0.24),P=0.54]方面差异无统计学意义;两组在术中出血量[MD=–17.12,95%CI(–31.16,–3.08),P=0.02]、术后第1 d疼痛评分[MD=–1.30,95%CI(–1.85,–0.75),P0.000 01]、术后第3 d疼痛评分[MD=–0.82,95%CI(–1.00,–0.65),P0.000 01]方面差异有统计学意义。结论单孔法与多孔法胸腔镜下肺叶切除术治疗非小细胞肺癌效果相当;在术中出血量、第1 d及第3 d疼痛评分方面,单孔组手术较多孔组手术有一定的优势。     

机器人与腹腔镜经括约肌间切除治疗低位直肠癌疗效比较的meta分析

目的评价机器人腹腔镜经括约肌间切除术(intersphincteric resection,ISR)治疗低位直肠癌的临床疗效。方法检索中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方数据库、PubMed、Embase及Cochrane library的相关文献。检索时间为各数据库建库至2019年4月1日,用Review Manager 5.2软件对相关的指标进行meta分析。结果共有5篇文献510例患者纳入分析,其中机器人组273例,传统腹腔镜组237例。与腹腔镜组相比,机器人组的手术时间[MD=43.27,95%CI(16.48,70.07),P=0.002]增加、术中出血量[MD=–19.98.27,95%CI(–33.14,–6.81),P=0.003]减少、中转开腹率[MD=0.20,95%CI(0.04,–0.95),P=0.04]降低、淋巴结获取数目[MD=–1.71,95%CI(–3.21,–0.21),P=0.03]减少以及住院时间[MD=–1.61,95%CI(–2.26,–0.97),P0.000 01]缩短,其差异均具有统计学意义。但术后肛门排气时间[MD=–0.01,95%CI(–0.48,0.46),P=0.96]、进食时间[MD=–0.20,95%CI(–0.67,0.27),P=0.41]、并发症发生率[OR=0.76,95%CI(0.50,1.14),P=0.18]、肿瘤距远切缘距离[MD=0.00,95%CI(–0.17,0.17),P=0.98]以及环周切缘阳性率[OR=0.61,95%CI(0.27,1.37),P=0.23]与腹腔镜组比较,差异均无统计学意义。结论机器人和腹腔镜ISR治疗低位直肠癌显示了相似的围手术期结果;尽管机器人ISR手术时间更长、淋巴结获取数目更少,但术中出血更少、中转开腹率更低以及住院时间更短。机器人ISR是一种安全有效的治疗低位直肠癌的技术。     

Comparison of Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate and University of Wisconsin Preservation in Renal Transplantation

Histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) is replacing University of Wisconsin (UW) solution as the preservation fluid for renal allografts in many centers, but recent large-scale data to support this transition are lacking. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patient and graft outcomes after renal transplantation at our center, comparing 475 consecutive living donor and 317 deceased donor transplants since the adoption of HTK with equal numbers of grafts preserved using UW solution. Data collected included donor and recipient age, race, sex, comorbidities and graft ischemia time. Graft and patient survival, as well as the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF), were studied by Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analysis. No significant difference was seen in either patient or graft survival. Deceased donor kidneys in the HTK group had a higher incidence of DGF than the UW cohort, whereas this trend was reversed in the case of living donor organs. In multivariate analysis, HTK was associated with a significant risk reduction on the incidence of DGF. Prolonged preservation with HTK compared to UW was not associated with excess risk to the graft or patient. In summary, HTK demonstrated efficacy similar to UW in terms of patient and graft survival.     

Histidine‐Tryptophan‐Ketoglutarate for Pancreas Allograft Preservation: The Indiana University Experience

Histidine‐tryptophan‐ketoglutarate solution (HTK) has been scrutinized for use in pancreas transplantation. A recent case series and a United Network for Organ Sharing data base review have suggested an increased incidence of allograft pancreatitis and graft loss with HTK compared to the University of Wisconsin solution (UW). Conversely, a recent randomized, controlled study failed to show any significant difference between HTK and UW for pancreas allograft preservation. This study was a retrospective review of all pancreas transplants performed at Indiana University between 2003 and 2009 comparing preservation with HTK or UW. Data included recipient and donor demographics, 7‐day, 90‐day and 1‐year graft survival, peak 30‐day serum amylase and lipase, HbA1c and C‐peptide levels. Of the 308 pancreas transplants, 84% used HTK and 16% UW. There were more SPK compared to pancreas after kidney and pancreas transplant alone in the HTK group. Donor and recipient demographics were similar. There was no significant difference in 7‐day, 90‐day or 1‐year graft survival, 30‐day peak serum amylase and lipase, HbA1c or C‐peptide. No clinically significant difference between HTK and UW for pancreas allograft preservation was identified. Specifically, in the context of low‐to‐moderate flush volume and short cold ischemia time (≤10 h), no increased incidence of allograft pancreatitis or graft loss was observed.     

Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate (HTK) Is Associated with Reduced Graft Survival of Deceased Donor Kidney Transplants

Single-center studies have reported equivalent outcomes of kidney allografts recovered with histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) or University of Wisconsin (UW) solution. However, these studies were likely underpowered and often unadjusted, and multicenter studies have suggested HTK preservation might increase delayed graft function (DGF) and reduce graft survival of renal allografts. To further inform clinical practice, we analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database of deceased donor kidney transplants performed from July 2004 to February 2008 to determine if HTK (n = 5728) versus UW (n = 15 898) preservation impacted DGF or death-censored graft survival. On adjusted analyses, HTK preservation had no effect on DGF (odds ratio [OR] 0.99, p = 0.7) but was associated with an increased risk of death-censored graft loss (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, p = 0.008). The detrimental effect of HTK was a relatively late one, with a strong association between HTK and subsequent graft loss in those surviving beyond 12 months (HR 1.43, p = 0.007). Interestingly, a much stronger effect was seen in African-American recipients (HR 1.55, p = 0.024) than in Caucasian recipients (HR 1.18, p = 0.5). Given recent studies that also demonstrate that HTK preservation reduces liver and pancreas allograft survival, we suggest that the use of HTK for abdominal organ recovery should be reconsidered.     

Comparison of histidine-tryptophan ketoglutarate solution and University of Wisconsin solution in prolonged cold preservation of kidney allografts

Although University of Wisconsin (UW) solution is the standard preservation solution for organ transplantation, Histidine-Tryptophan Ketogluatarate (HTK) solution has been increasingly used. This study compared HTK or UW for cold static storage of kidney allografts. In all, 149 renal transplants were performed with cold ischemic times (CI) greater than 16 hr (UW 87, HTK 62) and a subset analysis was performed with CI over 24 hr (HTK 31, UW 38). Data from receiving renal transplant centers focused on delayed graft function (DGF), patient and allograft survival. In CI greater than 16 hr, graft and patient survival were comparable. HTK cohort had lower DGF. In CI greater than 24 hr, there was no difference in patient survival, a trend towards improved graft survival in HTK, and decreased rate of DGF in HTK. This data suggests that UW and HTK have at least similar efficacy in kidney preservation at longer ischemic times.     

Histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution vs. University of Wisconsin solution for liver transplantation: a systematic review.

University of Wisconsin (UW) solution has been recognized as the gold standard in liver preservation, but its limitations are becoming obvious, such as risk of biliary complications and its high cost. Alternatively, the effects of histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK), such as improved biliary protection and low cost, have been observed. This systematic review is conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of these 2 solutions. Databases from 1966 to June 2006 were searched. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing HTK and UW solutions for liver transplantation were included. Ten articles including 11 comparisons (1,200 patients) met the inclusion criteria, containing 2 RCTs and 9 cohort studies. No marked differences existed between the 2 groups in patient and graft survival rates, acute rejection, primary nonfunction, primary dysfunction, delayed graft function, and ALT and AST levels after transplantation. The only positive result was observed in the bile production after deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT), which was statistically significantly higher in HTK group than that of UW group (95% confidence interval, 18.65-57.47; P=0.0001). Although the difference in biliary complications between the 2 groups did not reach statistical significance, HTK was thought to be more effective for biliary tract flush and prevention of biliary complications in some studies. There was no statistically significant difference of effects (except bile production) between HTK and UW. But trends were documented in some studies for the superiority of HTK in biliary tract flush, prevention of biliary complications, and cost saving. Adequately powered RCTs with longer follow-up periods are required to evaluate the long-term effect of these 2 solutions.     

Comparison of histidine-tryptophan ketoglutarate and University of Wisconsin solutions as primary preservation in renal allografts undergoing pulsatile perfusion

INTRODUCTION: University of Wisconsin (UW) solution is the standard preservation solution for organ transplantation. Histidine-tryptophan ketogluatarate (HTK) solution has been used increasingly for kidney, pancreas, and liver transplantation. This study compared HTK and UW used during kidney procurement with subsequent pulsatile perfusion. METHODS: Between January and October 2003, 91 deceased renal and simultaneous kidney pancreas transplants were performed (UW, n = 41, and HTK, n = 50). There were no differences with regard to donor and recipient demographics or cold ischemia. RESULTS: Delayed graft function occurred in 3 (7%) of UW and 4 (8%) of HTK-preserved kidneys (P = NS). There were no significant differences between patient or graft survival. There was an anticipated difference between total preservative volumes used (HTK: 4.1 +/- 1.0 vs UW: 3.0 +/- 0.5; P < .005). CONCLUSION: UW and HTK appear to have similar efficacy in kidney preservation with pulsatile perfusion. HTK preservation solution can be used safely in conjunction with pulsatile preservation for cold storage of renal allografts.     

Comparison of histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution and University of Wisconsin solution in adult liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: A safe and effective preservation solution is a precondition for successful orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This study compared University of Wisconsin (UW) and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) solutions in OLT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 137 primary cadaveric. OLT performed between January 2003 and December 2006 at our institution. Sixty-eight grafts were harvested using UW and 69 using HTK. Recipients were managed similarly in regard to operative techniques and immunosuppression. We collected donor data including serum transaminases, serum sodium, ICU stay and assessed macroscopic liver quality. Recipient serum transaminases were collected on postoperative days 1, 7, 14, and 30. We compared biliary and vascular complications, as well as patient and graft survivals. RESULTS: Mean serum bilirubin levels were slightly higher in the HTK group at 1,7,14, and 30 days after transplantation, whereas transaminases were higher in the UW group. Primary nonfunction occurred in 1 patient in each group. Retransplantation was performed in 5 patients in the UW and in 9 patients in the HTK group. Biliary complication rates were similar in the UW and HTK groups (22% and 17%, respectively). Six arterial complications occurred in the HTK (8.7%) and 2 in the UW group (2.9%; P < .05). Mean follow-up was 25 months. Graft survival at 1, 12, and 36 months was 90%, 78%, and 75% versus 90%, 71%, and 71% in the UW versus HTK groups, respectively. One-, 12-, and 36-month patient survival rates were 93%, 78%, and 75% versus 93%, 78%, and 78% in the UW versus HTK groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in graft and patient survivals between the 2 groups. Whereas the biliary complication rates were comparable in both groups, the arterial complications were clearly higher in the UW group (8.7% vs 2.9%; P < .05%). UW and HTK solutions seemed to be equally safe and effective in the preservation of liver grafts. The high incidence of arterial complications in the UW group requires further prospective studies.     

Randomized clinical assay for hepatic grafts preservation with University of Wisconsin or histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solutions in liver transplantation

University of Wisconsin (UW) solution has been the standard for preservation of liver transplantation grafts since 1989. However, some studies demonstrated that histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) solution is also effective. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of both solutions in liver transplantation. From January 2003 to August 2004 the livers of deceased donors were randomized into HTK and UW groups. The 102 studied patients included 65 (63.7%) in the UW group and 37 (36.3%) in the HTK group. Sex, race, hemodynamic state, use of adrenergic drugs, and presence of steatosis in the donor were similarly distributed in the two groups (P > .05). The mean age of the donors was 38.1 years (SD +/-14.4) in the UW group and 44.6 years (SD +/-14.2) in the HTK cohort (P = .036). Sex, race, age, etiology of the cirrhosis, retransplant, acute liver failure, portal thrombosis, and Child-Pugh and MELD scores in the recipients were similarly distributed in the two recipient samples (P > .05). Among 89 patients who completed 4 months of follow-up, the HTK group included eight cases (25.8%) of biliary complications versus five cases (8.6%) in the UW group (P = .033; OR = 2.0 95% CI = 1.2-3.5). The incidence of graft dysfunction was 2.8% in the HTK group and 9.4% in the UW group (P = .15). In conclusion, UW and HTK solutions were equally effective for the preservation of the hepatic graft. The routine use of HTK solution can reduce the costs of liver transplantation.     

Insulin in University of Wisconsin solution exacerbates the ischemic injury and decreases the graft survival rate in rat liver transplantation

BACKGROUND: Insulin keeps the liver in a metabolically vigorous state. However, organ preservation aims to decrease the metabolic rate. The objective of this study was to clarify the effect of insulin used in University of Wisconsin (UW) preservation solution on the liver graft. METHODS: The liver grafts were preserved by UW solution with or without insulin for 7, 9, and 24 hr, respectively. The influence of insulin was studied by 7-day survival rate, liver function, morphology, and intragraft gene expression 24 hr after transplantation. Morphology was studied on the preserved grafts. RESULTS: The morphology of the graft in the insulin group showed more severe ischemia-reperfusion injury. The 7-day graft survival rates of the 7-hr subgroups with and without insulin were 55% and 93%, respectively (P=0.02). In the 9-hr subgroups, the survival rates were 0% and 78%, respectively (P=0.002). The serum levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (P=0.008) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (P=0.032) were higher in the 7-hr subgroup with insulin. The same trend was found in the 9-hr subgroups (AST, P=0.016; ALT, P=0.016). The expression level of 215 genes were much lower at 24 hr after transplantation in the grafts preserved with insulin than in those preserved without insulin, and most of the genes were related to metabolic activities. CONCLUSIONS: Insulin in UW solution may exacerbate graft ischemic injury and decrease the graft survival rate in rat liver transplantation. Insulin, in the absence of glucose in UW solution, may exhaust the metabolic activity of the liver graft. It is harmful rather than helpful for isolated rat liver grafts preserved in UW solution.     

Comparison of histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution and University of Wisconsin solution for organ preservation in clinical pancreas transplantation

BACKGROUND: University of Wisconsin (UW) solution is currently the standard preservation solution used for abdominal organ transplantation. This study assesses the efficacy of histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) compared with UW in pancreas transplantation. METHODS: Between October 2002 and August 2003, 20 pancreas transplants were performed. Patients were divided into two groups: UW (n=10) and HTK (n=10). Donor and recipient demographics were similar in both groups. The mean cold ischemia time for both groups was 11 +/-3 hr. RESULTS: There was an anticipated difference between total preservative volumes used (HTK: 4.5 +/- 1.2 L vs. UW: 3.4 +/-0.8 L; P =0.03). Patient and graft survivals to date were 100% in both groups. Serum fasting blood glucose, peak amylase, and serial amylase levels remained comparable at all intervals posttransplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Within this range of cold ischemia time, UW and HTK demonstrate similar efficacy in pancreas preservation.