Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution

Matthew S. Kokotilo, Kimberly Schlachter, Jodi Carter, Aducio Thiesen, Rachel G. Khadaroo, Thomas A. Churchill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Our lab has developed a novel strategy for intestinal preservation involving the intraluminal delivery of a nutrient-rich preservation solution. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two impermeant agents for use in our solution: Dextran 70 (D70; Mw = 70. kDa) and Hydroxyethyl starch (HES; Mw = 2200. kDa). Methods: Rat intestines were procured, including an intravascular flush with University of Wisconsin solution followed by a 'backtable' intraluminal flush with: UW solution (group 1, UW), or an amino acid-based nutrient-rich preservation solution (AA solution) containing either 5% D70 (group 2, AA-D70) or HES (group 3, AA-HES). Tissue samples ( n= 6) were taken at 2, 4, 8, and 12. h cold storage; histology, energetic, end-product, and oxidative parameters were assessed. In separate groups ( n= 4), D70 and HES were fluorescently labeled with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) in order to directly observe mucosal penetration of the starch and dextran. Results: Over the 12. h storage time-course, direct visualization of the fluorescently labeled D70 showed penetration of the mucosal layer as early as 2. h and progressively continued to do so throughout the 12. h period. In contrast, HES did not cross the mucosal barrier and remained captive within the lumen. As time of storage progressed, grade of injury increased in all groups, however, at 4 and 12. h the AA-HES treated tissues exhibited significantly less injury compared to UW and AA-D70,. P< 0.05. AA-HES group showed on moderate villus clefting (median grade 2 P< 0.05) while the AA-D70 group exhibited complete villus denudation (grade 4) and the UW group had extensive injury into the regenerative cryptal regions (grade 6). Metabolic parameters revealed a preferential maintenance of ATP and Energy Charge; increases in lactate, alanine and ammonium supported the involvement of aerobic and anaerobic pathways for energy production. Conclusion: The results of this study challenge the idea that oncotic support is not a fundamental requirement of static organ storage. Furthermore, our data suggests that HES is an effective oncotic agent for use in our intraluminal nutrient-rich preservation solution, while Dextran 70 is not.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)254-262
Number of pages9
JournalCryobiology
Volume61
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

dextran
Dextrans
Starch
starch
Nutrients
Food
villi
Wounds and Injuries
Tissue
Cold storage
storage time
nutrients
Histology
storage organs
Fluorescein
Ammonium Compounds
Alanine
isothiocyanates
energy
Intestines

Keywords

  • Intestinal-specific
  • Mucosal permeability
  • Organ preservation solution
  • Osmotic/oncotic agents

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Kokotilo, M. S., Schlachter, K., Carter, J., Thiesen, A., Khadaroo, R. G., & Churchill, T. A. (2010). Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution. Cryobiology, 61(3), 254-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2010.09.002

Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution. / Kokotilo, Matthew S.; Schlachter, Kimberly; Carter, Jodi; Thiesen, Aducio; Khadaroo, Rachel G.; Churchill, Thomas A.

In: Cryobiology, Vol. 61, No. 3, 01.12.2010, p. 254-262.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kokotilo, MS, Schlachter, K, Carter, J, Thiesen, A, Khadaroo, RG & Churchill, TA 2010, 'Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution', Cryobiology, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 254-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2010.09.002
Kokotilo, Matthew S. ; Schlachter, Kimberly ; Carter, Jodi ; Thiesen, Aducio ; Khadaroo, Rachel G. ; Churchill, Thomas A. / Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution. In: Cryobiology. 2010 ; Vol. 61, No. 3. pp. 254-262.
@article{b67f3c3a439d44f7881684bbb942ee4d,
title = "Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution",
abstract = "Introduction: Our lab has developed a novel strategy for intestinal preservation involving the intraluminal delivery of a nutrient-rich preservation solution. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two impermeant agents for use in our solution: Dextran 70 (D70; Mw = 70. kDa) and Hydroxyethyl starch (HES; Mw = 2200. kDa). Methods: Rat intestines were procured, including an intravascular flush with University of Wisconsin solution followed by a 'backtable' intraluminal flush with: UW solution (group 1, UW), or an amino acid-based nutrient-rich preservation solution (AA solution) containing either 5{\%} D70 (group 2, AA-D70) or HES (group 3, AA-HES). Tissue samples ( n= 6) were taken at 2, 4, 8, and 12. h cold storage; histology, energetic, end-product, and oxidative parameters were assessed. In separate groups ( n= 4), D70 and HES were fluorescently labeled with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) in order to directly observe mucosal penetration of the starch and dextran. Results: Over the 12. h storage time-course, direct visualization of the fluorescently labeled D70 showed penetration of the mucosal layer as early as 2. h and progressively continued to do so throughout the 12. h period. In contrast, HES did not cross the mucosal barrier and remained captive within the lumen. As time of storage progressed, grade of injury increased in all groups, however, at 4 and 12. h the AA-HES treated tissues exhibited significantly less injury compared to UW and AA-D70,. P< 0.05. AA-HES group showed on moderate villus clefting (median grade 2 P< 0.05) while the AA-D70 group exhibited complete villus denudation (grade 4) and the UW group had extensive injury into the regenerative cryptal regions (grade 6). Metabolic parameters revealed a preferential maintenance of ATP and Energy Charge; increases in lactate, alanine and ammonium supported the involvement of aerobic and anaerobic pathways for energy production. Conclusion: The results of this study challenge the idea that oncotic support is not a fundamental requirement of static organ storage. Furthermore, our data suggests that HES is an effective oncotic agent for use in our intraluminal nutrient-rich preservation solution, while Dextran 70 is not.",
keywords = "Intestinal-specific, Mucosal permeability, Organ preservation solution, Osmotic/oncotic agents",
author = "Kokotilo, {Matthew S.} and Kimberly Schlachter and Jodi Carter and Aducio Thiesen and Khadaroo, {Rachel G.} and Churchill, {Thomas A.}",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cryobiol.2010.09.002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "254--262",
journal = "Cryobiology",
issn = "0011-2240",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing the effects of Dextran 70 and Hydroxyethyl starch in an intestinal storage solution

AU - Kokotilo, Matthew S.

AU - Schlachter, Kimberly

AU - Carter, Jodi

AU - Thiesen, Aducio

AU - Khadaroo, Rachel G.

AU - Churchill, Thomas A.

PY - 2010/12/1

Y1 - 2010/12/1

N2 - Introduction: Our lab has developed a novel strategy for intestinal preservation involving the intraluminal delivery of a nutrient-rich preservation solution. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two impermeant agents for use in our solution: Dextran 70 (D70; Mw = 70. kDa) and Hydroxyethyl starch (HES; Mw = 2200. kDa). Methods: Rat intestines were procured, including an intravascular flush with University of Wisconsin solution followed by a 'backtable' intraluminal flush with: UW solution (group 1, UW), or an amino acid-based nutrient-rich preservation solution (AA solution) containing either 5% D70 (group 2, AA-D70) or HES (group 3, AA-HES). Tissue samples ( n= 6) were taken at 2, 4, 8, and 12. h cold storage; histology, energetic, end-product, and oxidative parameters were assessed. In separate groups ( n= 4), D70 and HES were fluorescently labeled with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) in order to directly observe mucosal penetration of the starch and dextran. Results: Over the 12. h storage time-course, direct visualization of the fluorescently labeled D70 showed penetration of the mucosal layer as early as 2. h and progressively continued to do so throughout the 12. h period. In contrast, HES did not cross the mucosal barrier and remained captive within the lumen. As time of storage progressed, grade of injury increased in all groups, however, at 4 and 12. h the AA-HES treated tissues exhibited significantly less injury compared to UW and AA-D70,. P< 0.05. AA-HES group showed on moderate villus clefting (median grade 2 P< 0.05) while the AA-D70 group exhibited complete villus denudation (grade 4) and the UW group had extensive injury into the regenerative cryptal regions (grade 6). Metabolic parameters revealed a preferential maintenance of ATP and Energy Charge; increases in lactate, alanine and ammonium supported the involvement of aerobic and anaerobic pathways for energy production. Conclusion: The results of this study challenge the idea that oncotic support is not a fundamental requirement of static organ storage. Furthermore, our data suggests that HES is an effective oncotic agent for use in our intraluminal nutrient-rich preservation solution, while Dextran 70 is not.

AB - Introduction: Our lab has developed a novel strategy for intestinal preservation involving the intraluminal delivery of a nutrient-rich preservation solution. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two impermeant agents for use in our solution: Dextran 70 (D70; Mw = 70. kDa) and Hydroxyethyl starch (HES; Mw = 2200. kDa). Methods: Rat intestines were procured, including an intravascular flush with University of Wisconsin solution followed by a 'backtable' intraluminal flush with: UW solution (group 1, UW), or an amino acid-based nutrient-rich preservation solution (AA solution) containing either 5% D70 (group 2, AA-D70) or HES (group 3, AA-HES). Tissue samples ( n= 6) were taken at 2, 4, 8, and 12. h cold storage; histology, energetic, end-product, and oxidative parameters were assessed. In separate groups ( n= 4), D70 and HES were fluorescently labeled with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) in order to directly observe mucosal penetration of the starch and dextran. Results: Over the 12. h storage time-course, direct visualization of the fluorescently labeled D70 showed penetration of the mucosal layer as early as 2. h and progressively continued to do so throughout the 12. h period. In contrast, HES did not cross the mucosal barrier and remained captive within the lumen. As time of storage progressed, grade of injury increased in all groups, however, at 4 and 12. h the AA-HES treated tissues exhibited significantly less injury compared to UW and AA-D70,. P< 0.05. AA-HES group showed on moderate villus clefting (median grade 2 P< 0.05) while the AA-D70 group exhibited complete villus denudation (grade 4) and the UW group had extensive injury into the regenerative cryptal regions (grade 6). Metabolic parameters revealed a preferential maintenance of ATP and Energy Charge; increases in lactate, alanine and ammonium supported the involvement of aerobic and anaerobic pathways for energy production. Conclusion: The results of this study challenge the idea that oncotic support is not a fundamental requirement of static organ storage. Furthermore, our data suggests that HES is an effective oncotic agent for use in our intraluminal nutrient-rich preservation solution, while Dextran 70 is not.

KW - Intestinal-specific

KW - Mucosal permeability

KW - Organ preservation solution

KW - Osmotic/oncotic agents

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78649683402&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78649683402&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2010.09.002

DO - 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2010.09.002

M3 - Article

VL - 61

SP - 254

EP - 262

JO - Cryobiology

JF - Cryobiology

SN - 0011-2240

IS - 3

ER -