肝脏体外灌流中直接灌流与间接灌流效果的比较研究

目的在体外肝脏灌流（ECLP）实施技术研究中，对直接灌流和间接灌流孰优孰劣一直存在争议。本实验拟就临床应用对这两种方法进行评价。方法实验动物供体均为普通健康长白猪，体重在20～30kg，雌雄不拘。一组受体是普通健康长白猪，标准与供体相同；另一组受体是普通健康狗，体重在20～30kg，雌雄不拘。随机分为2组，直接灌流受体为肝衰猪，间接灌流受体为肝衰狗：A组（直接灌流组，n=5）体外肝脏与受体间直接进行血液交换；B组（间接灌流组，72-4）体外肝脏用猪血液进行ECLP循环，受体血液自循环，两个循环间的血液通过中空纤维管进行物质交换。A、B两组进行ECLP灌流时间均为4h，肝衰时间为8h，8h后处死。观察体外肝脏和受体一般情况，体外肝脏的胆汁生成量、耗氧率等，受体的血氨、肝脏酶谱和血凝情况等指标。结果A、B两组在体外肝脏的胆汁生成量、耗氧率和受体方面均没有明显的差异（P〉0．05）。结论虽然直接灌注和间接灌注两者在体外肝脏的存活和灌注效果方面没有明显的差异，但考虑到间接灌注在异种灌注中具有伦理学压力较小的诸多优点，而临床应用又以异种灌注为主，故临床应用时仍推荐应用间接灌注。

Direct vs. indirect perfusion for extracorporeal liver perfusion

Objective To compare the direct with indirect perfusion for extracorporeal liver perfusion. Methods Porcine liver was harvested from health pigs weighing 20-30 kg by the standard procedure for human retrieval. The pigs were randomized into 2 groups. The direct perfusion was performed in group A (n=5) and the recipients were pigs with acute liver failure (ALF). The indirect perfusion was conducted in group B (n=4) and the recipients were dogs with ALF. The time for ECLP was 4h and that for ALF 8 h. The data of bile and oxygen consuming ratio (OCR) of the perfused liver and some data of the recipients were collected and analyzed. Results There were no significant differences in the data between the 2 groups (P>0.05). Conclusions Though there is no significant difference between the 2 groups, indirect perfusion is better than direct one.