Ischemic Postconditioning Assessment in the Liver of Rats Undergoing Mesenteric Ischemia and Reperfusion

Abstract

IntroductionIschemic postconditioning is a method that shows evidence of efficacy in minimizing reperfusion injury; however, its effectiveness in preventing injuries in distant organs is still unknown, especially in those who have undergone mesenteric ischemia and reperfusion.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of ischemic postconditioning in preventing reperfusion injury in the liver of rats submitted to mesenteric ischemia and reperfusion, comparing two different methods of ischemic postconditioning.Methods30 Wistar male rats were used, distributed into three groups: Group A: Ten rats submitted to intestinal ischemia for 30 minutes followed by reperfusion for 60 minutes; Group B: Ten rats subjected to ischemia and reperfusion; after ischemia, two cycles of reperfusion (two minutes each) interleaved with two cycles of ischemia (two minutes each); and Group C: Ten rats subjected to ischemia and reperfusion; after ischemia, four cycles of reperfusion (30 seconds each) interspersed with four cycles of ischemia (30 seconds each). After the experiment, the left lobe of the liver was resected for subsequent histological analysis, using the following classification: grade 1 - centrilobular congestion; grade 2 - centrilobular congestion with some degeneration of hepatocytes in one or two central veins; and grade 3 - multifocal centrilobular congestion and degeneration of portal hepatocytes.ResultsThe mean degree of liver damage found was 1.8 in group A, 1.7 in group B and 1.3 in group C. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups.ConclusionIschemic postconditioning was unable to minimize reperfusion injury in rats undergoing mesenteric ischemia and reperfusion.

Atorvastatin Can Prevent Hepatic Remote Reperfusion Injury

“…The difference between the good result observed here and that published by Santos et al 17 may be due to the fact that these authors performed intestinal IR, whereas here aortic clamping was used. Also the RI periods were different between this study and that of Santos et al 17 (30 and 60 min IR, respectively). Perhaps the ischemia produced directly in the intestine, whose blood is fully drained to the liver leads to ROS overload, whereas in aortic IR this can be slowed down.…”

“…However, as a method of evaluation, these authors used the dosage of transaminases, different from the one used here. Santos et al 17 also performed histological analysis, not confirming the efficacy of the method. The difference between the good result observed here and that published by Santos et al 17 may be due to the fact that these authors performed intestinal IR, whereas here aortic clamping was used.…”

“…Santos et al 17 also performed histological analysis, not confirming the efficacy of the method. The difference between the good result observed here and that published by Santos et al 17 may be due to the fact that these authors performed intestinal IR, whereas here aortic clamping was used. Also the RI periods were different between this study and that of Santos et al 17 (30 and 60 min IR, respectively).…”

“…15 found that IPC was able to prevent hepatic reperfusion injury at a distance, performing mesenteric IR, but in 2016, Santos et al . 17 have not shown the same results and there is therefore a question to be clarified as to the actual ability of the IPC to prevent such liver lesions.…”