Advertisement

Venovenous Allotransplantation in the Rat

  • T. Schang
  • B. von Gaudecker
  • A. Thiede

Abstract

In previous studies, Engemann et al. [2] and Körner [4] were able to demonstrate that vein grafts transplanted into the venous system have the capacity to sensitize allogeneic recipients. Vein grafting led to accelerated rejection of subsequent donor-type skin grafts and to the production of cytotoxic antibodies to donor-type tissue. However, all allogeneic vein grafts showed long-term patency, and histologically they appeared to be intact when investigated between 20 and 100 days postoperatively. In particular, no mononuclear cellular infiltrations could be found within this period. Allogeneic vein grafts in nonim-munosuppressed recipients were not distinguishable from syngeneic vein grafts 100 days postoperatively. These findings were unexpected, because both arterial allografts [5, 6] and venous allografts [1] used for arterial replacement in the rat underwent a marked cellular infiltration even if long-term patency was achieved. Therefore, the aim of our study was to compare syngeneic and allogeneic venovenous grafts by means of morphometric methods. Especially morphological alterations of the vein grafts during the early postoperative phase were to be investigated.

Keywords

Vein Graft Elastic Fiber Cellular Infiltration Early Postoperative Phase Allogeneic Graft 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Deltz E, Sonntag H, Thiede A (1977) Funktionelle und morphologische Untersuchungen bei allogenen Venentransplantaten. Vasa 6:211–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Engemann R, Körner H, Thiede A (1977) Microsurgical venous replacement in allogeneic rat strain combinations. 12th Congress of the European Society of Surgical Research, WarsawGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gronemeyer U (1979) Zur Immunbiologie der Hornhauttransplantation. Modelluntersuchungen an Inzuchtratten. Postdoctoral thesis, University of Kiel, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Körner H (1979) Veno-venöse Tranplantationen in standardisierten Rattenmzuchtstammkombinationen. Die Bedeutung der Sensibilisierung für das Transplantatverhalten. Thesis, University of Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thiede A, Engemann R, Körner H, Müller-Ruchholtz W (1979) Comparison of the immunological reactions of arterial transplants in the arterial system and of venous transplants in the venous system using inbred strains of rats. Transplant Proc 11:603–609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Timmermann W, Thiede A (1981) Histologische und funktionelle Untersuchungen an Femoralarterientransplantaten bei Ratten. Vasa 10:141–147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams GM, terHaar A, Krajewski C, Parks LC, Roth J (1975) Rejection and repair of endothelium in major vessel transplants. Surgery 78:694–706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zilles K, Schleicher A, Kretschmann HJ (1978) A quantitative approach to cytoarchitectonics. The areal pattern of the cortex of Tupaia belangeri. Anat Embryol (Berl) 153:195–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Schang
  • B. von Gaudecker
  • A. Thiede

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations