Is the early or delayed remote ischemic preconditioning the more effective from a microcirculatory and histological point of view in a rat model of partial liver ischemia-reperfusion?

4Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare early-and late-effect remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) by analyzing the microcirculatory, hemodynamic and histological changes in partial liver ischemia-reperfusion of rats. Methods: 60-minute partial liver ischemia followed by 120-minute reperfusion was performed without (Control group, n=7) or with preconditioning. In RIPC groups a tourniquet was applied around the left thigh using 3 cycles of 10-minute ischemia/10-minute reperfusion, one (RIPC-1, n=7) or twenty-four hours (RIPC-24, n=7) before I/R. Hemodynamic and microcirculatory measurements were performed before and after ischemia and in 30th, 60th and 120th minute of reperfusion and histological examination at the end of reperfusion. Results: Blood pressure decreased in all groups followed by biphasic changes in Control group. In RIPC groups R120 values returned almost to normal. Heart rate increased in Control and RIPC-1 groups at R120, while RIPC-24 did not show significant changes. Microcirculation of non-ischemic liver stayed constant in Control and showed significant changes in RIPC-24 group, while in ischemic liver elevated by R120 in all groups. RIPC didn’t reduce histological alterations. Conclusion: Considering the survival and the results, both remote ischemic preconditioning protocols had beneficial effect in hepatic ischemia-reperfusion, however the histopathological findings were controversial.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Magyar, Z., Varga, G., Mester, A., Ghanem, S., Somogyi, V., Tanczos, B., … Nemeth, N. (2018). Is the early or delayed remote ischemic preconditioning the more effective from a microcirculatory and histological point of view in a rat model of partial liver ischemia-reperfusion? Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, 33(7), 597–608. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-865020180070000005

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free