Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29760544›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2018

Ischemia/reperfusion injury in porcine intestine - Viability assessment.

Runar J Strand-Amundsen, Henrik M Reims, Finn P Reinholt, Tom E Ruud, Runkuan Yang, Jan O Høgetveit, Tor I Tønnessen

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Sub-1.4 cmNature · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Runar J Strand-AmundsenDepartment of Clinical and Biomedical Engineering, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Henrik M ReimsDepartment of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Finn P ReinholtDepartment of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Tom E RuudInstitute for Surgical Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Runkuan YangDepartment of Emergencies and Critical Care, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Jan O HøgetveitDepartment of Clinical and Biomedical Engineering, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Tor I TønnessenDepartment of Emergencies and Critical Care, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo 0424, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate viability assessment of segmental small bowel ischemia/reperfusion in a porcine model.

methodsIn 15 pigs, five or six 30-cm segments of jejunum were simultaneously made ischemic by clamping the mesenteric arteries and veins for 1 to 16 h. Reperfusion was initiated after different intervals of ischemia (1-8 h) and subsequently monitored for 5-15 h. The intestinal segments were regularly photographed and assessed visually and by palpation. Intraluminal lactate and glycerol concentrations were measured by microdialysis, and samples were collected for light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. The histological changes were described and graded.

resultsUsing light microscopy, the jejunum was considered as viable until 6 h of ischemia, while with transmission electron microscopy the ischemic muscularis propria was considered viable until 5 h of ischemia. However, following ≥ 1 h of reperfusion, only segments that had been ischemic for ≤ 3 h appeared viable, suggesting a possible upper limit for viability in the porcine mesenteric occlusion model. Although intraluminal microdialysis allowed us to closely monitor the onset and duration of ischemia and the onset of reperfusion, we were unable to find sufficient level of association between tissue viability and metabolic markers to conclude that microdialysis is clinically relevant for viability assessment. Evaluation of color and motility appears to be poor indicators of intestinal viability.

conclusionThree hours of total ischemia of the small bowel followed by reperfusion appears to be the upper limit for viability in this porcine mesenteric ischemia model.

Indexed as

Tissue SurvivalAnimalsColorFemaleGastrointestinal MotilityIntestinal MucosaJejunumMaleMesenteric Vascular OcclusionMicrodialysisMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionPhotographyReperfusion InjurySus scrofaSwineTime FactorsHistologyIschemiaJejunumMicrodialysisPorcine modelReperfusionViability

Identifiers

PMID29760544
PMCPMC5949714
OpenAlexW2802059480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.