Enhanced prevention of cell death by hypothermic storage with propyl gallate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current hypothermic preservation solutions are insufficient to prevent donor organ injury during hypothermic storage, which negatively impacts graft functional recovery and survival after transplantation. This study was to evaluate whether supplementation of the preservation solutions with antioxidant propyl gallates (PG) reduced cell injury during hypothermic storage and subsequently rewarming-reoxygenation or transplantation. Human cells and rat aorta were stored in University of Wisconsin (UW) or hyperbranched polyglycerol (HPG) solution supplemented with PG at 4 °C, followed by rewarming-reoxygenation with atmospheric O 2 at 37 °C and isotransplantation, respectively. Cell or tissue injury was measured by lactate dehydrogenase release, flow cytometric and histologic analyses. Here, we showed that PG supplementation significantly increased antioxidative activities of both UW and HPG solutions, and its concentrations for maximum protection of different human cells from hypothermic storage-induced cell death were estimated between 25 and 50 μM, which was also indicated by increased cell survival or decreased cell apoptosis during rewarming-reoxygenation. The PG cytoprotection was correlated with its inhibition of lipid peroxidation, prevention of mitochondrial dysfunction or an increase in ATP content. The enhanced cytoprotection of preservation solutions by PG supplementation was confirmed in hypothermic storage of rat aortas, indicated by less tissue damage and higher levels of tissue ATP during the hypothermic storage and less chronic injury after transplantation. In c onclusion, cell injury during hypothermic storage and subsequently rewarming-reoxygenation was substantially prevented by the hypothermic preservation with PG, suggesting that PG is a promising antioxidant for hypothermic preservation of donor cells or organs in transplantation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".