Open Access

Establishment of renal failure models by laparoscopy in bama pigs which underwent partial nephrectomy and radical contralateral nephrectomy

Hai-Feng Liu

Hai-Feng Liu

  • Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural UniversityChengdu, P.R. China
  • Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Liu, Hai-Feng
, 
Hui Li

Hui Li

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Li, Hui
, 
Ge Bai

Ge Bai

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Bai, Ge
, 
Qian-Zhen Zhang

Qian-Zhen Zhang

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Zhang, Qian-Zhen
, 
Xiang-Gao,

Xiang-Gao,

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Xiang-Gao,
, 
Tao Liu

Tao Liu

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Liu, Tao
 and 
Hong-Bin Wang

Hong-Bin Wang

Department of Veterinary Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, Northeast Agricultural UniversityHarbin, P.R. China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Wang, Hong-Bin
  
Sep 13, 2019
Establishment of renal failure models by laparoscopy in bama pigs which underwent partial nephrectomy and radical contralateral nephrectomy's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Download Cover
Published Online: Sep 13, 2019
Page range: 447 - 455
Received: Dec 24, 2018
Accepted: Aug 06, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jvetres-2019-0052
Keywords
© 2019 H.-F. Liu et al. published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Fig. 1

The clamped artery was released two seconds after suturing to confirm haemostasis. The two haemostatic clips were released completely when there was no haemorrhage
The clamped artery was released two seconds after suturing to confirm haemostasis. The two haemostatic clips were released completely when there was no haemorrhage

Fig. 2

Rectal temperature in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
Rectal temperature in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 3

Heart rate in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
Heart rate in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 4

WBC in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
WBC in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 5

RBC in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚) group q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point ???
RBC in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚) group q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point ???

Fig. 6

PLT in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
PLT in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 7

CRE in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
CRE in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 8

BUN in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point
BUN in 15 pigs (n = 5 for ⅔ group, n = 5 for ¾ group, n = 5 for ⅚ group) q – preoperative baseline* p < 0.05 compared with the preoperative baseline. A p < 0.05 compared with value of ⅔ group at the same time point. B p < 0.05 compared with value of ¾ group at the same time point

Fig. 9

Histological examination after ⅚ nephrectomy. The picture was captured in microscope vision.A – normal renal tissue, B – at 4 weeks after surgery, C – at 10 weeks after surgery. All at 400×
Histological examination after ⅚ nephrectomy. The picture was captured in microscope vision.A – normal renal tissue, B – at 4 weeks after surgery, C – at 10 weeks after surgery. All at 400×
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Life Sciences, Molecular Biology, Microbiology and Virology, Life Sciences, other, Medicine, Veterinary Medicine
Journal RSS Feed