BACKGROUND: Portal triad clamping was first described by Pringle in 1908 as a mean of reducing bleeding from the cut surface of the liver during parenchymal resection. More recently some studies have reported that one period of portal triad clamping could be well tolerated for a longer duration, 60~90 minutes. The liver, generally, is believed to be very sensitive to anoxic damage and susceptible to ischemia and decreased hepatic energy charge results in decreasing arterial ketone body ratio (AKBR) during portal triad clamping. METHODS: In order to observe an adverse effects to liver in 30 minutes and 60 minutes of portal triad clamping on AKBR and histologic changes,rabbits were divided into thirty minutes of portal triad clamping in one group (Group I) and 60 minutes of that in the other group (Group II). RESULTS: During clamping, the mean AKBR of group I and II were 0.39 and 0.44, and decreased significantly compared with the mean AKBR (1.08 and 1.02) before clamping. Five minute after declamping, the mean AKBR of group II (0.49) was lower (P<0.05) than that of group I (0.63), but 30 minutes afterdeclamping, the AKBR of two groups had little difference (group I ; 0.57, group II 0.59, P>0.05). Under light microscopic examination of liver biopsy, there was no visible diffrences between two groups during clamping, 5 minutes and 30 minutes after declamping. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that there was no difference in hepatic energy change(AKBR) and histologic change under light microscopy after 30 minutes declamping between two groups.
Biopsy ; Constriction ; Hemorrhage ; Ischemia ; Liver ; Microscopy ; Rabbits*

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Abdominal distension from the insufflation of air can create more troublesome discomfort after colonoscopy (CFS) than after upper endoscopy. Many patients report difficulty in expelling insufflated air after CFS. One previous study demonstrated that insertion of rectal tube at the conclusion of CFS significantly improves patient satisfaction with the procedure. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of rectal tube placement for abdominal decompression after CFS in an effort to limit patient discomfort by carefully applying air suction during CFS. METHODS: We conducted a prospective trial in 103 consecutive patients undergoing elective CFS. Patients were randomized to receive rectal tube placement at the end of the procedure or simple air suction during the procedure. Patients were evaluated by clinical symptoms and signs 10 minutes after completion of CFS. RESULTS: All 103 patients had a complete examination of the colon to the cecum. No specific complications occurred during and a day after examination. The two groups were well matched with respect to age, sex, height, weight, chief complaints. There were no significant differences between the two groups for bowel preparation, duration of examination, abdominal pain during procedure, abdominal disten-sion 10 minutes after CFS, and abdominal pain 10 minutes after CFS (p >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Meticulous air suction during CFS reduces abdominal discomfort and distension after CFS and is as effectively as the placement of a rectal tube at the con-clusion of CFS.
Abdominal Pain ; Cecum ; Colon ; Colonoscopy* ; Endoscopy ; Humans ; Insufflation ; Lower Body Negative Pressure ; Patient Satisfaction ; Prospective Studies ; Suction