↓ Skip to main content

Alternative solution for ex vivo lung perfusion, experimental study on donated human lungs non-accepted for transplantation1

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Alternative solution for ex vivo lung perfusion, experimental study on donated human lungs non-accepted for transplantation1
Published in
Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, May 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0102-865020150050000008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucas Matos Fernandes, Alessandro Wasum Mariani, Israel Lopes de Medeiros, Marcos Naoyuki Samano, Luís Gustavo Abdalla, Aristides Tadeu Correia, Natália Aparecida Nepomuceno, Mauro Canzian, Paulo Manuel Pêgo-Fernandes

Abstract

To evaluate a new perfusate solution to be used for ex vivo lung perfusion. Randomized experimental study using lungs from rejected brain-dead donors harvested and submitted to 1 hour of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) using mainstream solution or the alternative. From 16 lungs blocs tested, we found no difference on weight after EVLP: Steen group (SG) = 1,097±526g; Alternative Perfusion Solution (APS) = 743±248g, p=0.163. Edema formation, assessed by Wet/dry weigh ratio, was statistically higher on the Alternative Perfusion Solution group (APS = 3.63 ± 1.26; SG = 2.06 ± 0.28; p = 0.009). No difference on PaO2 after EVLP (SG = 498±37.53mmHg; APS = 521±55.43mmHg, p=0.348, nor on histological analyses: pulmonary injury score: SG = 4.38±1.51; APS = 4.50±1.77, p=0.881; apoptotic cells count after perfusion: SG = 2.4 ± 2.0 cells/mm2; APS = 4.8 ± 6.9 cells/mm2; p = 0.361). The ex vivo lung perfusion using the alternative perfusion solution showed no functional or histological differences, except for a higher edema formation, from the EVLP using Steen Solution(r) on lungs from rejected brain-dead donors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Master 5 13%
Other 4 10%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 54%
Engineering 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%