Unfeasible experimental model of normothermic hepatic ischemia and reperfusion in rats using the Pringle maneuver

• Autor(a) principal: GOMES,Helbert Minuncio Pereira
• Data de Publicação: 2014
• Outros Autores: SERIGIOLLE,Leonardo Carvalho, RODRIGUES,Daren Athiê Boy, LOPES,Carolina Marques, STUDART,Sarah do Valle, LEME,Pedro Luiz Squilacci
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-67202014000300196
• topic: Models, animal; Scientific misconduct; Liver/surgery; Portal vein; Reperfusion injury

BACKGROUND: The negative result of a research does not always indicate failure, and when the data do not permit a proper conclusion, or are contrary to the initial project, should not simply be discarded and archived. AIM: To report failure after performing experimental model of liver ischemia and reperfusion normothermic, continuous or intermittent, in small animals aiming at the study of biochemical and histological parameters after postoperative recovery. METHODS: Fifteen Wistar rats were divided into three groups of five animals each; all underwent surgery, the abdomen was sutured after the proposed procedures for each group and the animals were observed for 6 h or until they died, and then were reoperated. In Group 1, control (sham-operated): dissection of the hepatic hilum was performed; in Group 2: clamping of the hepatic hilum for 30 m; in Group 3: clamping of the hepatic hilum for 15 m, reperfusion for 5 m and another 15 m of clamping. Data from Groups 2 and 3 were compared with Student's t test. RESULTS: All animals of Group 1 survived for 6 h. Two animals in Group 2 died before the 6 h needed to validate the experiment; two did not recover from anesthesia and one survived until the end. In Group 3, four animals died before the 6 h established and one of them survived the required time. Only one animal in Group 2 and one in Group 3 survived and were able to accomplish the study. There was no statistical significance when the results of Groups 2 and 3 were compared (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The death of six animals before the necessary period of observation turned the initial proposal of the experiment unfeasible.