4.6 Article

Nitric Oxide Ventilation of Rat Lungs from Non-Heart-Beating Donors Improves Posttransplant Function

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages 2707-2715

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02840.x

Keywords

Actin cytoskeleton; assessment; ex vivo assessment; experimental transplantation; graft function; ischemia; reperfusion injury; lung transplantation; MAP kinase; nitric oxide; non-heart-beating donors; nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kappa B); pulmonary vascular physiology; rat; TNF-alpha

Funding

  1. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation [EGAN06P0]
  2. UNC Lung Transplant Research Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lungs from non-heart-beating donors (NHBDs) would enhance the donor pool. Ex vivo perfusion and ventilation of NHBD lungs allows functional assessment and treatment. Ventilation of rat NHBD lungs with nitric oxide (NO) during ischemia, ex vivo perfusion and after transplant reduced ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and improved lung function posttransplant. One hour after death, Sprague-Dawley rats were ventilated for another hour with either 60% O2 or 60% O2/40 ppm NO. Lungs were then flushed with 20-mL cold Perfadex, stored cold for 1 h, perfused in an ex vivo circuit with Steen solution and warmed to 37 degrees C, ventilated 15 min, perfusion-cooled to 20 degrees C, then flushed with cold Perfadex and stored cold. The left lung was transplanted and ventilated separately. Recipients were sacrificed after 1 h. NO-ventilation was associated with significantly reduced wet:dry weight ratio in the ex vivo circuit, better oxygenation, reduced pulmonary vascular resistance, increased lung tissue levels of cGMP, maintained endothelial NOS eNOS, and reduced increases in tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS). NO-ventilation had no effect on MAP kinases or NF-kappa B activation. NO administration to NHBDs before and after lung retrieval may improve function of lungs from NHBDs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available