ArticleHippokratia
The relevance between graft preservation solutions and QTc interval during living donor kidney transplantation and rat cardiomyocytes sampling.
Article in Hippokratia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of the retrospective study was to identify the impacts of different solutions on the electrocardiogram and cardiovascular changes. Moreover, the differences between these solutions were analyzed by examining their impacts on rat ventricular cardiomyocytes.
methodsEighty renal transplant patients were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups: Group UW (n =40) used the University of Wisconsin solution, and Group HTK (n =40) used the Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate solution. Electrocardiograms of the subjects were obtained three times at different periods; during the pre-perfusion, intraoperative kidney reperfusion, and postperfusion phase at the end of the surgery. Any Electrocardiogram or cardiovascular alterations were noted and analyzed. Adult male Wistar rats were used for
resultsSinus bradycardia was detected in 19 patients of Group UW, while there was short-term asystole in eight patients. However, no cardiac changes were observed in Group HTK patients. In both Groups, reperfusion and postperfusion corrected QT (QTc) intervals were different from pre-perfusion QTc intervals. Group UW patients' reperfusion and postperfusion QTc's values were higher than those of the Group HTK patients. In rat myocytes, prominent asystole episodes were observed at specific concentrations of the UW solution compared to the HTK solution. The UW solution depolarized the resting membrane potential significantly and decreased the peak value of action potential, whereas the HTK solution did not elicit a significant change in those parameters. Accordingly, the UW solution elicited a significant inward current at -70 mV, while the HTK solution activated only a modest current, which may not change the membrane potential.
conclusionProlongation of QTc intervals was detected with reperfusion in both groups according to electrocardiography analysis. However, the QTc interval was observed to be longer in cases using the UW solution and required intervention intraoperatively. HIPPOKRATIA 2021, 25 (1):22-30.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35221652PMC8877929W4214779199What 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.