ArticlePediatric surgery international2005
Bacterial translocation in acute rejection after small bowel transplantation in rats.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural shifts of fecal microbial communities in rats with acute rejection after liver transplantation.Microbial ecology · 2012Article
- Toll-like receptor 4 contributes to small intestine allograft rejection.Transplantation · 2010Article
- Kampo medicine "Dai-kenchu-to" prevents bacterial translocation in rats.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2008Article
- Experimental small bowel preservation using Polysol: a new alternative to University of Wisconsin solution, Celsior and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate solution?World journal of gastroenterology · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute rejection after small bowel transplantation (SBTx) may facilitate bacterial translocation (BT) and subsequent changes in the liver, spleen, and lungs. This study investigated whether BT occurs after acute rejection and whether this is followed by changes in the structure of the intestine and the phagocytic organs interposed between the gut and the general circulation. Orthotopic SBTx was performed in allogeneic (ALLO) rat-strain combinations (BN-Wistar, n=5). For comparison we used syngeneic SBTx (SYN) (BN-BN, n=6) controls. Animals were sacrificed on postoperative day 7. Mesenteric lymph nodes and portal and caval blood were cultured for aerobes and anaerobes. Escherichia coli beta-galactosidase DNA was assessed by polymerase chain reaction in the blood samples. Intestine, liver, spleen, and lung protein and DNA contents were measured. Histologic changes were graded according to standard criteria of acute rejection. For comparisons we used chi(2) and nonparametric Mann-Whitney test with a threshold of significance of p<0.05. ALLO rats lost more weight after SBTx than SYN rats (-13.02+/-4.39% vs. -8.04+/-5.08% of preoperative weight), although the difference was not significant (ns). A variable degree of graft rejection was histologically demonstrated in all ALLO rats, and DNA/protein content in the graft was significantly higher in this group (0.245+/-0.85 vs. 0.134+/-0.21, p<0.05). Gram-negative enteric bacteria were found in 4/5 ALLO and 4/6 SYN rats (ns), and aerobic Gram-positive bacteria in 2/5 and 3/6 (ns), respectively. Anaerobic growth occurred in mesenteric lymph nodes in one ALLO rat and in the bloodstream in another one. E. coli DNA was isolated in none of the ALLO but in two SYN rats (ns). BT was frequent after SBTx in both syngeneic and allogeneic strain combinations. Contrary to our expectations, BT after SBTx was not higher in ALLO group rats. However, anaerobic germs were isolated only in this group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.