Objective:To explore the effects of compound Danshen dripping pills (CDDP) and CDDP combined with transplantation of human umbilical cord blood cells (HUMNCs) on the inlfammatory response, oxidative stress, myocardial cell apoptosis and cardiac function, and also to investigate the possible mechanisms of the combined therapy in the acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
Methods:Rabbit model of AMI successfully established by ligation of the letf anterior coronary artery (LAD). Forty rabbits were randomly divided into 4 groups (n=10 per group):a control group, injected with 0.5 mL of saline in 24 h atfer AMI and then gavaged with 5 mL of saline daily;a CDDP group, injected with saline 0.5 mL atfer AMI and then gavaged with CDDP (270 mg/d) daily;a transplantation group, injected with 0.5 mL of saline contained 3 × 107 HUCBMCs [labeled with green fluorescent protein (GFP)] and then gavaged with 5 mL of saline daily;a combined group, injected with 0.5 mL of saline contained 3 × 107 HUCBMCs (labeled with GFP) and then gavaged with CDDP (270 mg/d) daily. Cardiac function index such as left ventricular fractional shorting (LVFS) and ejection fraction(LVEF) were measured by echocardiography;the pathological changes were observed by HE staining and the white blood cells in the myocardium were determined by light microscopy. hTe superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and malondialdehyde (MDA) content in myocardium were detected by nitrotetrazolium blue chloride (NBT) and thiobarbituric acid colorimetric measurement respectively. hTe number of transplanted cells in the myocardium was examined by GFP positive cells counted with lfuorescence microscopy.
Results:1) Compared with the control group (at 1 or 4 week), LVEF and LVFS were signiifcant improved in the CDDP group, the transplantation group and the combined groups (all P<0.05), the improvement degree of cardiac function in the combined group was the most significance. There was no significant difference between the CDDP group and the transplantation group. 2) Compared with the control group (at 1 or 4 week), the number of white blood cell, myocardial cell apoptosis ratio were decreased signiifcantly in the CDDP group, the transplantation group and the combined groups (all P<0.05), this decrease in the combined group was the most signiifcance, and there was no significant difference between the CDDP group and the transplantation group. 3) Compared with control (at 4 week), the SOD activity was increased signiifcantly, and MDA content in myocardium was decreased in the CDDP group, this change in the combined group was the most signiifcance. 4) GFP-positive cells were found to be present in the peri-myocardial infarction area in the transplantation group and the combined group at 1, 4 weeks post-transplantation. hTe number of the GFP positive cells in the combined group was more than that in the transplantation group (P<0.05).
Conclusion:The intravenous transplantation of HUMNCs combined with the CDDP in the treatment of rabbits with AMI could increase the survival rate of transplanted cells and inhibit the myocardial cell apoptosis, therefore improve the heart function. hTe possible mechanism of the combined treatment may be involved in the inhibition of the inlfammatory response and oxidative stress in the myocardium following AMI.

Objective:This study aimed to explore the clinical application value of the indication selection criteria for bi-pedicled deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flap(DIEP) versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap(TRAM) combined with DIEP for breast reconstruction.Methods:The clinical data of patients who underwent delayed bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery in the Department of Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery and Department of Mammoplasty, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2008 to April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the indications for each procedure, corresponding blood supply source was selected. Subsequently, patients were divided into two groups: bi-pedicled DIEP group and pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group according to the type of blood supply source. The indication selection criteria for pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap was as follows: lack of two groups of recipient vessels; no dominant perforator in the abdominal donor site; previous abdominal liposuction or abdominal surgery with large dissection range and severe scar; patients were unable to tolerate prolonged surgery or had high risk factors for microsurgery. A comparison of breast reconstruction surgery characteristics was conducted between the two groups. Independent-samples t-test, rank sum test, Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact probability method were used to analyze various data including age, body mass index (BMI), time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy, history of chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length, preoperative and postoperative conditions, as well as postoperative complications. Statistical significance was defined at P<0.05. Results:A total of 54 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction were included in this study with a mean age of 42.2 years (range, 30-59 years). The pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group consisted of 21 patients with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 33-56 years) while the bi-pedicled DIEP group comprised 33 patients with a mean age of 41.8 years (30-59 years). Out of the 54 patients, a total of 38 were eventually followed up, comprising 14 in the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and 24 in the bi-pedicled DIEP group. The average follow-up duration for the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group was 42 months (range, 6-69 months). Abdominal bulge occurred in one patient, while another patient experienced abdominal hernia. The average follow-up duration for the bi-pedicled DIEP group was 47 months (6-179 months), with no reported cases of abdominal bulge or abdominal hernia. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups regarding age, BMI, time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy or chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length or time to ambulation (all P>0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference noted in duration of surgery between the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and bi-pedicled DIEP group [6.0(5.5-6.5) hours vs. 8.5(8.0-8.8) hours] ( P<0.01). Comparison analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of partial flap necrosis (0/21 vs. 1/33), abdominal incision dehiscence (2/21 vs. 2/33), abdominal bulge (1/14 vs. 0 /24) or abdominal hernia (1/1 vs. 0/24) between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:For patients who needed bilateral vascular pedicled lower abdominal wall for breast reconstruction, utilizing a pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap did not increase surgical complication risks. The proposed indication selection criteria for using a pedicled TRAM + DIEP combined flap outlined in this study could serve as guidance when choosing methods for bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction.

Objective:This study aimed to explore the clinical application value of the indication selection criteria for bi-pedicled deep inferior epigastric arterial perforator flap(DIEP) versus pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap(TRAM) combined with DIEP for breast reconstruction.Methods:The clinical data of patients who underwent delayed bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgery in the Department of Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery and Department of Mammoplasty, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2008 to April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the indications for each procedure, corresponding blood supply source was selected. Subsequently, patients were divided into two groups: bi-pedicled DIEP group and pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group according to the type of blood supply source. The indication selection criteria for pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap was as follows: lack of two groups of recipient vessels; no dominant perforator in the abdominal donor site; previous abdominal liposuction or abdominal surgery with large dissection range and severe scar; patients were unable to tolerate prolonged surgery or had high risk factors for microsurgery. A comparison of breast reconstruction surgery characteristics was conducted between the two groups. Independent-samples t-test, rank sum test, Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact probability method were used to analyze various data including age, body mass index (BMI), time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy, history of chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length, preoperative and postoperative conditions, as well as postoperative complications. Statistical significance was defined at P<0.05. Results:A total of 54 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction were included in this study with a mean age of 42.2 years (range, 30-59 years). The pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group consisted of 21 patients with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 33-56 years) while the bi-pedicled DIEP group comprised 33 patients with a mean age of 41.8 years (30-59 years). Out of the 54 patients, a total of 38 were eventually followed up, comprising 14 in the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and 24 in the bi-pedicled DIEP group. The average follow-up duration for the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group was 42 months (range, 6-69 months). Abdominal bulge occurred in one patient, while another patient experienced abdominal hernia. The average follow-up duration for the bi-pedicled DIEP group was 47 months (6-179 months), with no reported cases of abdominal bulge or abdominal hernia. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups regarding age, BMI, time interval between breast cancer surgery and breast reconstruction surgery, history of radiotherapy or chemotherapy, history of smoking, history of lower abdominal surgery, history of hypertension, original surgical incision type, length and width of flap, hospitalization length or time to ambulation (all P>0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference noted in duration of surgery between the pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap group and bi-pedicled DIEP group [6.0(5.5-6.5) hours vs. 8.5(8.0-8.8) hours] ( P<0.01). Comparison analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in terms of partial flap necrosis (0/21 vs. 1/33), abdominal incision dehiscence (2/21 vs. 2/33), abdominal bulge (1/14 vs. 0 /24) or abdominal hernia (1/1 vs. 0/24) between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:For patients who needed bilateral vascular pedicled lower abdominal wall for breast reconstruction, utilizing a pedicled TRAM+ DIEP combined flap did not increase surgical complication risks. The proposed indication selection criteria for using a pedicled TRAM + DIEP combined flap outlined in this study could serve as guidance when choosing methods for bi-pedicled abdominal flap breast reconstruction.