ArticleJournal of gastroenterology2013
Intermittent clamping is superior to ischemic preconditioning and its effect is more marked with shorter clamping cycles in the rat liver.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology, 2013. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of a Pringle maneuver on jejunal mucosal oxygenation and blood flow in a porcine model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- How much ischemia can the liver tolerate during resection?Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2016Review
- Low-power laser irradiation fails to improve liver regeneration in elderly rats at 48 h after 70 % resection.Lasers in medical science · 2015Article
- Liver regeneration following partial hepatectomy is improved by enhancing the HGF/Met axis and Akt and Erk pathways after low-power laser irradiation in rats.Lasers in medical science · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntermittent clamping (IC) and ischemic preconditioning (PC) reportedly protect the liver against the ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury induced by inflow occlusion during hepatectomy. While IC cycles consisting of 15 min of clamping with 5 min of reperfusion are used empirically, the optimal IC cycle has not been established. We compared the effects of various cycles of IC and PC in the rat liver.
methodsRats subjected to 60 min of inflow occlusion were assigned to the following five groups (n = 8 each): 60 min of continuous ischemia; 4 cycles comprising 15 min of ischemia/5 min of reperfusion; 6 cycles comprising 10 min of ischemia/3.3 min of reperfusion; 12 cycles comprising 5 min of ischemia/1.7 min of reperfusion (the time ratio of ischemia to reperfusion in the IC groups was 3:1); and PC (10/10 min of ischemia/reperfusion) prior to 60 min of ischemia. The severity of liver injury was assessed by determining the serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level, bile flow, tissue glutathione content, and induction of apoptosis (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated biotin nick end-labeling [TUNEL] staining and DNA laddering), and by histological examination of areas of severe necrosis.
resultsAll the parameters indicated that liver injury was attenuated in the three IC groups compared with the continuous group; furthermore, this effect became increasingly marked with shorter cycles of IC. PC did not exert a protective effect under the present experimental conditions.
conclusionVarious cycles of IC consistently conferred protection against I/R injury, and IC with shorter cycles of ischemia and reperfusion was more effective. No protective effect of PC was evident. IC is a more robust strategy than the PC protocol for liver protection.
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.