Villegas ÁF, Jiménez BM, Roldán RM, González SJ

Language: Spanish
References: 6
Page: 65-69
PDF size: 152.97 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In order to simulate two concurrent postoperative conditions that may occur aftersegmental intestinal transplantation in adult living-related donor and recipient young growth phasewas carried out a controlled surgical trials, randomized experimental.
Methods: Male Lewis rats were used and formed eight groups of equal numbers, the first group ofyoung rats served as control and was not operated in the other two enteral resection was carried outlethal syngeneic intestinal transplantation including the terminal ileum blind from an equal numberof adult rats. Thus the first condition was simulated “Receiving.” Two groups of adult rats of similarweight enteral underwent resection of the jejunum 40% or 30% of the terminal ileum including theblind, which represented the “living donor” respective second condition. Finally the last group rep-resented the adult control without resection. For six consecutive months was conducted registrationweight, characteristics of discharges in both mortality and morbidity conditions. Finally, we measuredthe intestinal diameter, length and depth of the intestinal villi. To evaluate the differences between thegroups were used Dunnet test, Tukey and ANOVA.
Results: “Receiving” There were four deaths in the group TSY (syngeneic intestinal transplanta-tion 40% of the jejunum) and one in the TSD group (30% of terminal ileum including the blind).TSD survivors were seven. There were significant differences in glucose levels total protein, globulin,triglycerides, leukocytes, lymphocytes and segmented between, but not in albumin and enteral pa-rameters. “Donors” all rats with enteral resection survived.
Discussion: The demand for intestinal transplantation in reference centers far exceeds the numberof donors per year. Previous experimental studies suggest that distal segmental transplantation is aseffective as total transplant, so presumably related living donors could be a great choice, this experi-ment showed some undesirable effects in both adults and potential donors young recipients growth.

REFERENCES

1. Koehler AN, Yaworski JA, Gardner M, koco-schis S et Al. Coordinated interdisciplinary man-agement of pediatric intestinal failure: A 2 – yearreview. J Pediatr Surg 2000; 35: 380-5

2. Monchick GJ, Russel PS. Transplantation ofsmall bowel in the rata: Techical and immunologicalconsiderations. Surgery 1971; 70: 693-702.

3. Bueno J,Ohwada S, Kocoshis s et al Factors impacting the survival of children with intestinalfailure referred for intestinal transplantation.J Pedi-atr Surg 1999;34: 27-33.

4. Delviere L, Muiesan P, Marshall M, et al. Size reduction of small bowels from adult cadaveric to alleviate the scarcity of pediatric size-matched or-gans. Transplantation. 2000; 69: 1392-96.

5. Kimura K, La Rosa CA, Black, Jaffe BM)Suc-cessful segmental intestinal transplantation in en-terectomized pigs. Ann Surg 1990;211: 158-64.

6. Villegas AF, Várela FG, Jimenez BMA y col.Comparación de dos tipos de trasplante experimen-tal en el tratamiento del intestino corto letal Rev Investi Clin 1997;49: 197-204