Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background/purpose: For living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) it is of paramount importance to preserve as much viable liver tissue as possible to avoid postoperative complications in the donor and recipient. The depth of tissue damage caused by common surgical techniques for liver resection has not been studied so far.
Methods: Here we compared the depth of tissue damage and the immunohistochemical expression of heat shock protein (HSP) 70, a marker for tissue damage, in a porcine model of liver resection, to assess the effect of different surgical techniques, i.e., blunt dissection (BD), and dissection with an ultrasound aspirator (UA), an ultrasound scalpel (US), or a water-jet (WJ).
Results: Analysis with linear mixed effects models (LME) showed significantly less tissue damage with BD and UA than with US and WJ (joint p value <0.001). Damage also increased within 6 h after surgery (p value = 0.004). Semiquantitative evaluation of HSP 70 showed increased expression after resection with US compared to all other resection methods (p value <0.001), indicating increased tissue damage with this method.
Conclusion: We suggest that in cases of liver resection for LDLT surgeons should reevaluate using US and WJ because of possible excessive tissue damage compared to BD and UA. Overall we advocate the use of BD as it requires no special equipment and, hence, has considerably higher cost-effectiveness without compromising tissue preservation and clinical outcome and is readily available even in low-tech environments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3291831 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00534-010-0347-4 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!