dc.creatorGALVAO, Flavio Henrique
dc.creatorPOMPEU, Eduardo
dc.creatorMELLO, Evandro Sobroza de
dc.creatorCOSTA, Anderson da Costa Lino
dc.creatorMORY, Eduardo
dc.creatorSANTOS, Rafael Miyashiro dos
dc.creatorSANTOS, Vinicius Rocha
dc.creatorMACHADO, Marcel Cesar
dc.creatorBACCHELLA, Telesforo
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-19T17:25:37Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-04T15:07:30Z
dc.date.available2012-10-19T17:25:37Z
dc.date.available2018-07-04T15:07:30Z
dc.date.created2012-10-19T17:25:37Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.identifierXENOTRANSPLANTATION, v.15, n.3, p.184-190, 2008
dc.identifier0908-665X
dc.identifierhttp://producao.usp.br/handle/BDPI/22143
dc.identifier10.1111/j.1399-3089.2008.00470.x
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3089.2008.00470.x
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1618916
dc.description.abstractBackground: Organ shortage impairs the proposition of multivisceral transplantation to treat multiple organ failure. Interspecies (xeno) transplantation is a valid solution for organ shortage; however, suitable models of this advance are lacking. We describe an effective model of multivisceral xenotransplantation to study hyperacute rejection. Methods: Under general anesthesia, we in block recovered the distal esophagus, stomach, small bowel, colon, liver, pancreas, spleen, and kidneys from donors and implanted heterotopically in the lower abdomen of recipients. Animals were divided into four groups: I-canine donor, swine recipient (n = 6); II - swine donor, canine recipient (n = 5); III-canine donor, canine recipient (n = 4); and IV-swine donor, swine recipient (n = 5). Groups I and 11 comprised experimental (xenotransplantation) and III and IV control groups (allotransplantation). During the experiment, we appraised recipient evolution and graft modification by sequential biopsy up to 3 h. At this time, we killed animals for autopsy (experimental end point). Results: We accomplished all experiments successfully. Every grafts attained customary appearance and convenient urine output immediately after unclamp. Around 15 min after reperfusion, xenografts achieved signs of progressive hyperacute rejection and absence of urine output. At the end of experiments we observed moderate to severe hyperacute rejection at small bowel, colon, mesenteric lymph node, liver, spleen, pancreas, and kidney, while stomach and esophagus achieved mild lesions. In contrast, allograft achieved normal or minimum ischemia/reperfusion injury and constant urine output. Conclusion: The present procedure assembles a simple and effective model to study multivisceral xenotransplantation and may ultimately spread researches toward hyperacute rejection.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherWILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
dc.relationXenotransplantation
dc.rightsCopyright WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.subjectexperimental animal model
dc.subjectliver transplantation
dc.subjectmultiple organ failure
dc.subjectorgan transplantation
dc.subjecttissue and organ procurement
dc.subjecttransplantation immunology
dc.subjectxenotransplantation
dc.titleExperimental multivisceral xenotransplantation
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución