A comparative study of Euro-Collins, low potassium University of Wisconsin and cold modified blood solutions in lung preservation in acute autotransplantations in the pig

7Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the quality of lung preservation offered by Euro-Collins solution (EC), Cold Modified Blood solution (CMB) and low potassium University of Wisconsin solution (UWLP). Method: Fifteen right lung auto-transplantations (five for each solution) in the pig (Large White) were performed after 2 h of cold ischaemic storage in physiological solution at 4°C. Right lung biopsies were performed before ischaemia and 30 min after reperfusion, for histoenzymatic, histopathological and electron microscope studies. Results: After reperfusion, significant alterations were observed in the haemodynamics with only the right lung perfused; pulmonary arteriolar resistance increased by a factor of 5 in the EC group, by a factor of 4 in the CMB group and by a factor of 1.2 in the UWLP group; the right ventricular ejection fraction fell by 60% in the EC group, by 50% in the CMB group and by 31% in the UWLP group. Haemodynamic impairment was lower in the UWLP group (P<0.05; P<0.001) as was ischaemic-reperfusion injury (P<0.05). Oedema was observed in the EC group and extensive alveolar wall damage in the CMB group. Hypoxaemia was observed in all groups but the differences in the degree of hypoxaemia were not significant. Conclusions: The authors concluded that UWLP solution was the most effective of the three in this transplant model. Copyright © 2001 Elsevier Science B.V.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Divisi, D., Montagna, P., Jegaden, O., Giusti, L., Berti, A., Coloni, G. F., … Mikaeloff, P. (2001). A comparative study of Euro-Collins, low potassium University of Wisconsin and cold modified blood solutions in lung preservation in acute autotransplantations in the pig. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 19(3), 333–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00656-4

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