Exploring Preservation Modalities in a Split Human Pancreas Model to Investigate the Effect on the Islet Isolation Outcomes.


Journal

Transplantation direct
ISSN: 2373-8731
Titre abrégé: Transplant Direct
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101651609

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2024
Historique:
received: 15 02 2024
revised: 13 03 2024
accepted: 15 03 2024
medline: 17 6 2024
pubmed: 17 6 2024
entrez: 17 6 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In islet transplantation, the use of dynamic hypothermic preservation techniques is a current challenge. This study compares the efficacy of 3 pancreas preservation methods: static cold storage, hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP), and oxygenated HMP. A standardized human pancreas split model was employed using discarded organs from both donation after brain death (n = 15) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) (n = 9) donors. The pancreas head was preserved using static cold storage (control group), whereas the tail was preserved using the 3 different methods (study group). Data on donor characteristics, pancreas histology, isolation outcomes, and functional tests of isolated islets were collected. Insulin secretory function evaluated by calculating stimulation indices and total amount of secreted insulin during high glucose stimulation (area under the curve) through dynamic perifusion experiments was similar across all paired groups from both DCD and donation after brain death donors. In our hands, islet yield (IEQ/g) from the pancreas tails used as study groups was higher than that of the pancreas heads as expected although this difference did not always reach statistical significance because of great variability probably due to suboptimal quality of organs released for research purposes. Moreover, islets from DCD organs had greater purity than controls ( For the first time, a comparative analysis was conducted, using a split model, to assess the effects of various preservation methods on islets derived from pancreas donors. Nevertheless, no discernible variances were observed in terms of islet functionality, histological attributes, or isolation efficacy. Further investigations are needed to validate these findings for clinical application.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
In islet transplantation, the use of dynamic hypothermic preservation techniques is a current challenge. This study compares the efficacy of 3 pancreas preservation methods: static cold storage, hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP), and oxygenated HMP.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A standardized human pancreas split model was employed using discarded organs from both donation after brain death (n = 15) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) (n = 9) donors. The pancreas head was preserved using static cold storage (control group), whereas the tail was preserved using the 3 different methods (study group). Data on donor characteristics, pancreas histology, isolation outcomes, and functional tests of isolated islets were collected.
Results UNASSIGNED
Insulin secretory function evaluated by calculating stimulation indices and total amount of secreted insulin during high glucose stimulation (area under the curve) through dynamic perifusion experiments was similar across all paired groups from both DCD and donation after brain death donors. In our hands, islet yield (IEQ/g) from the pancreas tails used as study groups was higher than that of the pancreas heads as expected although this difference did not always reach statistical significance because of great variability probably due to suboptimal quality of organs released for research purposes. Moreover, islets from DCD organs had greater purity than controls (
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
For the first time, a comparative analysis was conducted, using a split model, to assess the effects of various preservation methods on islets derived from pancreas donors. Nevertheless, no discernible variances were observed in terms of islet functionality, histological attributes, or isolation efficacy. Further investigations are needed to validate these findings for clinical application.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38881744
doi: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001654
pii: TXD-2024-0047
pmc: PMC11177812
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e1654

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

Auteurs

Antoine Buemi (A)

Surgery and Abdominal Transplantation Division, Department of Surgery, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Nizar I Mourad (NI)

Pôle de Chirurgie Expérimentale et Transplantation, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Caroline Bouzin (C)

IREC Imaging Platform (2IP, RRID:SCR_023378), Institute of Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.

Arnaud Devresse (A)

Nephrology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Delphine Hoton (D)

Department of Anatomical Pathology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Aurelie Daumerie (A)

IREC Imaging Platform (2IP, RRID:SCR_023378), Institute of Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.

Francis Zech (F)

Pôle de Chirurgie Expérimentale et Transplantation, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Tom Darius (T)

Surgery and Abdominal Transplantation Division, Department of Surgery, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Nada Kanaan (N)

Nephrology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Pierre Gianello (P)

Pôle de Chirurgie Expérimentale et Transplantation, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Michel Mourad (M)

Surgery and Abdominal Transplantation Division, Department of Surgery, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Classifications MeSH