切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志 ›› 2013, Vol. 02 ›› Issue (06) : 399 -402. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3232.2013.06.013

所属专题: 文献

基础研究

肝移植患者围手术期氧化应激变化特点
高婉菱1, 池信锦1, 黎尚荣1,(), 葛缅1   
  1. 1. 510630 广州,中山大学附属第三医院麻醉科
  • 收稿日期:2013-08-22 出版日期:2013-12-10
  • 通信作者: 黎尚荣
  • 基金资助:
    广东省医学科学技术研究基金(A2010173)

Characteristics of oxidative stress changes in patients during perioperation of liver transplantation

Wan-ling GAO1, Xin-jin CHI1, Shang-rong LI1,(), Mian GE1   

  1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, the Third Affiliated Hos-pital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China
  • Received:2013-08-22 Published:2013-12-10
  • Corresponding author: Shang-rong LI
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: LI Shang-rong, Email:
引用本文:

高婉菱, 池信锦, 黎尚荣, 葛缅. 肝移植患者围手术期氧化应激变化特点[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2013, 02(06): 399-402.

Wan-ling GAO, Xin-jin CHI, Shang-rong LI, Mian GE. Characteristics of oxidative stress changes in patients during perioperation of liver transplantation[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2013, 02(06): 399-402.

目的

探讨不同原发病受体在肝移植围手术期氧化应激的变化特点。

方法

本前瞻性研究对象为2012年5月至2013年3月在中山大学附属第三医院行原位肝移植的30例患者。根据原发病不同将患者分为肝细胞肝癌(肝癌)组、乙型病毒性肝炎(乙肝)后肝硬化组(肝硬化组),慢性重型肝炎组(慢重肝组)。肝癌组13例,其中男9例,女4例;年龄24~62岁,中位年龄45岁。肝硬化组8例,其中男5例,女3例;年龄28~65岁,中位年龄43岁。慢重肝组9例,其中男6例,女3例;年龄30~60岁,中位年龄42岁。所有患者均签署知情同意书,符合医学伦理学规定。采用气管插管全身麻醉,术式均采用改良背驮式原位肝移植术。分别检测术前麻醉后(T1)、新肝期1 h(T2)、新肝期3 h(T3)及新肝期24 h(T4)4个时间点的血清丙二醛(MDA)、羟自由基(·OH)、谷胱甘肽S转移酶(GST)、总抗氧化能力(TAOC)。氧化应激指标数据采用MQ25Q75)表示,3组的氧化应激指标比较采用Kruskal-Wallis秩和检验。

结果

在T1、T2、T3时,肝癌组MDA分别为70(33,123)、64(34,125)、75(40,140)μmol/L,肝硬化组分别为33(24,42)、32(31,41)、43(30,52)μmol/L,慢重肝组分别为94(69,528)、65(54,311)、92(53,312)μmol/L,慢重肝组最高,肝硬化组最低,3组差异有统计学意义(Z=9.45,9.36,8.92;P<0.05)。T3时,肝癌组、肝硬化组、慢重肝组的·OH分别为1617(1330,2179)、2715(2192,3025)、1744(1568,2429)kU/L,肝硬化组最高,肝癌组最低,3组差异有统计学意义(Z=7.29,P<0.05)。T2时,肝癌组、肝硬化组、慢重肝组GST分别为297(256,317)、433(381,480)、367(278,545)kU/L,肝硬化组最高,肝癌组最低,3组差异有统计学意义(Z=9.26,P<0.05)。T1、T2、T3、T4时,肝癌组T-AOC分别为8(5,12)、6(5,10)、8(5,11)、11(6,14)kU/L,肝硬化组分别为6(5,11)、8(5,12)、13(7,14)、6(6,14)kU/L,慢重肝组分别为15(9,20)、11(9,18)、15(12,22)、25(20,31)kU/L,慢重肝组在各时点均最高,3组差异均有统计学意义(Z=10.48,6.59,11.42,11.68;P<0.05)。

结论

肝移植围手术期机体发生氧化应激反应,不同原发病引起的氧化损伤程度不同,慢性重型肝炎患者的氧化损伤程度比肝癌及乙肝后肝硬化患者更重。

Objective

To explore the characteristics of oxidative stress changes in recipients of different primary diseases during perioperation of liver transplantation.

Methods

Thirty patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation in the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from May 2012 to March 2013 were enrolled in this prospective study. According to different primary diseases, the patients were divided into hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) group, hepatitis B cirrhosis (cirrhosis) group, chronic severe hepatitis(CSH) group. There were 13 cases in HCC group with 9 males, 4 females, 24-62 years old and median age of 45 years old. There were 8 cases in cirrhosis group with 5 males, 3 females, 28-65 years old and median age of 43 years old. There were 9 cases in CSH group with 6 males, 3 females, 30-60 years old and median age of 42 years old. The informed consents of all patients were obtained and the ethical committee approval was received. All the patients underwent modified piggyback orthotopic liver transplantation under general anesthesia with tracheal intubation. The malondialdehyde (MDA), hydroxyl free radical (·OH), glutathione s-transferase (GST) levels and total antioxidant capacity (T-AOC) were examined at 4 time points: pre-operation and after induction (T1), 1 h after reperfusion (T2), 3 h after reperfusion (T3) and 24 h after reperfusion (T4). The indexes of oxidative stress in three groups were expressed in M[Q25, Q75] and were compared by Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test.

Results

The MDA levels at T1, T2, T3 were 70(33, 123), 64(34, 125), 75(40, 140)μmol/L respectively in HCC group, were 33(24, 42), 32(31, 41), 43(30, 52)μmol/L respectively in cirrhosis group and were 94(69, 528), 65(54, 311), 92(53, 312)μmol/L respectively in CSH group. The MDA level was the highest in CSH group and the lowest in cirrhosis group, and significant differences were observed among three groups (Z=9.45, 9.36, 8.92; P<0.05). The ·OH level at T3 were 1617(1330, 2179), 2715(2192, 3025), 1744(1568, 2429)kU/L respectively in HCC group, cirrhosis group and CSH group. The ·OH level at T3 was the highest in cirrhosis group and the lowest in HCC group, and significant difference was observed among three groups (Z=7.29, P<0.05). The GST levels at T2 were 297(256, 317), 433(381, 480), 367(278, 545)kU/L respectively in HCC group, cirrhosis group and CSH group. The GST level at T2 was the highest in cirrhosis group and the lowest in HCC group, and significant difference was observed among three groups (Z=9.26, P<0.05). The T-AOC at T1, T2, T3, T4 were 8(5, 12), 6(5, 10), 8(5, 11), 11(6, 14)kU/L respectively in HCC group, were 6(5, 11), 8(5, 12), 13(7, 14), 6(6, 14) kU/L respectively in cirrhosis group and were 15(9, 20), 11(9, 18), 15(12, 22), 25(20, 31)kU/L respectively in CSH group. The TAOC at all time points were the highest in CSH group (Z=10.48, 6.59, 11.42, 11.68; P<0.05).

Conclusions

Oxidative stress reaction occurs during the perioperation of liver transplantation. The different degree of oxidative damage is caused by different primary diseases. The oxidative damage is more severe in patients with chronic severe hepatitis than patients with HCC and hepatitis B cirrhosis.

表1 三组不同原发病肝移植患者围手术期临床资料比较(±s
表2 三组不同原发病肝移植患者围手术期氧化损伤指标变化[M(Q25Q75)]
表3 三组不同原发病肝移植患者围手术期抗氧化损伤指标变化[M(Q25Q75)]
[1]
Jaeschke H,Woolbright BL. Current strategies to minimize hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury by targeting reactive oxygen species. Transplant Rev, 2012, 26(2): 103-114.
[2]
Romano AD,Serviddio G,de Matthaeis A, et al. Oxidative stress and aging. J Nephrol, 2010, 23(Suppl 15): S29-S36.
[3]
Paracha UZ,Fatima K,Alqahtani M, et al. Oxidative stress and hepatitis C virus. Virol J, 2013, 10(1): 251.
[4]
王冰,汪根树,陈规划.肝脏缺血-再灌注损伤的发生机制研究进展.器官移植, 2010, 1(5): 319-320.
[5]
Palladini G,Ferrigno A,Rizzo V, et al. Lobe-specific heterogeneity and matrix metalloproteinase activation after ischemia/reperfusion injury in rat livers. Toxicol Pathol, 2012, 40(5): 722-730.
[6]
Ergenoglu M,Erbaᶊ O,Akdemir A, et al. Attenuation of ischemia/reperfusion-induced ovarian damage in rats: does edaravone offer protection? Eur Surg Res, 2013, 51(1/2): 21-32.
[7]
刘乐乐,傅诚章,周钦海,等.乌斯他丁对肝移植术中血浆细胞因子和SOD、MDA的影响.南京医科大学学报:自然科学版, 2005, 25(5): 350-352.
[8]
刘淳,周孝思,耿秋明.肝移植患者术中氧自由基相关指标的变化.天津医药, 2004, 32(10): 616-618.
[9]
Hassan ZK,Elobeid MA,Virk P, et al. Bisphenol A induces hepatotoxicity through oxidative stress in rat model. Oxid Med Cell Longev, 2012: 194829.
[10]
Kalaz EB,Coban J,Aydin AF, et al. Carnosine and taurine treatments decreased oxidative stress and tissue damage induced by D-galactose in rat liver. J Physiol Biochem, 2013, DOI:10.1007/s13105-013-0275-2 [Epub ahead of print].
[11]
葛缅,池信锦,刘德昭,等.大鼠自体原位肝移植模型中肠道羟自由基、丙二醛和总抗氧化能力的变化.中国病理生理杂志, 2012, 28(4): 723-726.
[12]
Karsen H,Binici I,Sunnetcioglu M, et al. Association of paraoxonase activity and atherosclerosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Afr Health Sci, 2012, 12(2): 114-118.
[13]
Sánchez-Valle V,Chávez-Tapia NC,Uribe M, et al. Role of oxidative stress and molecular changes in liver fibrosis: a review. Curr Med Chem, 2012, 19(28): 4850-4860.
[14]
华何与,杨运高,张红栓.重症肝炎的中西医结合治疗方案中需重视抗氧化损伤.中医药导报, 2013, 19(3): 1-3.
[15]
Elias-Miró M,Jiménez-Castro MB,Rodés J, et al. Current knowledge on oxidative stress in hepatic ischemia/reperfusion. Free Radic Res, 2013, 47(8): 555-568.
[16]
Song X,Zhang N,Xu H, et al. Combined preconditioning and postconditioning provides synergistic protection against liver ischemic reperfusion injury. Int J Biol Sci, 2012, 8(5): 707-718.
[17]
Wang J,Kan Q,Li J, et al. Effect of neferine on liver ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats. Transplant Proc, 2011, 43(7): 2536-2539.
[1] 李华志, 曹广, 刘殿刚, 张雅静. 不同入路下行肝切除术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的临床对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 52-55.
[2] 常小伟, 蔡瑜, 赵志勇, 张伟. 高强度聚焦超声消融术联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的效果及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[3] 屈翔宇, 张懿刚, 李浩令, 邱天, 谈燚. USP24及其共表达肿瘤代谢基因在肝细胞癌中的诊断和预后预测作用[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 659-662.
[4] 王浩源, 汪海洋, 孙建明, 陈以宽, 祁小桐, 唐博. 腹腔镜与开放修补对肝硬化腹外疝患者肝功能及凝血的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 654-659.
[5] 中华医学会器官移植学分会. 肝移植术后缺血性胆道病变诊断与治疗中国实践指南[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 739-748.
[6] 傅斌生, 冯啸, 杨卿, 曾凯宁, 姚嘉, 唐晖, 刘剑戎, 魏绪霞, 易慧敏, 易述红, 陈规划, 杨扬. 脂肪变性供肝在成人劈离式肝移植中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 789-794.
[7] 公宇, 廖媛, 尚梅. 肝细胞癌TACE术后复发影响因素及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 818-824.
[8] 李一帆, 朱帝文, 任伟新, 鲍应军, 顾俊鹏, 张海潇, 曹耿飞, 阿斯哈尔·哈斯木, 纪卫政. 血GP73水平在原发性肝癌TACE疗效评价中的作用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 825-830.
[9] 刘敏思, 李荣, 李媚. 基于GGT与Plt比值的模型在HBV相关肝细胞癌诊断中的作用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 831-835.
[10] 魏志鸿, 刘建勇, 吴小雅, 杨芳, 吕立志, 江艺, 蔡秋程. 肝移植术后急性移植物抗宿主病的诊治(附四例报告)[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 846-851.
[11] 焦振东, 惠鹏, 金上博. 三维可视化结合ICG显像技术在腹腔镜肝切除术治疗复发性肝癌中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 859-864.
[12] 陈晓鹏, 王佳妮, 练庆海, 杨九妹. 肝细胞癌VOPP1表达及其与预后的关系[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 876-882.
[13] 袁雨涵, 杨盛力. 体液和组织蛋白质组学分析在肝癌早期分子诊断中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 883-888.
[14] 吴警, 吐尔洪江·吐逊, 温浩. 肝切除术前肝功能评估新进展[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 889-893.
[15] 中华医学会器官移植学分会, 中华医学会外科学分会外科手术学学组, 中华医学会外科学分会移植学组, 华南劈离式肝移植联盟. 劈离式供肝儿童肝移植中国临床操作指南[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 593-601.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?