Renoprotective effect of platelet-rich plasma in obstructive uropathy

Purpose To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in reducing renal injury in ureteral obstruction. Methods Twenty-four Wistar Albino rats were randomized and divided into four groups as the donor ( n  = 6), sham ( n  = 6), saline ( n  = 6), and PRP ( n  = 6). Blood was obtained from t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International urology and nephrology Vol. 53; no. 6; pp. 1073 - 1079
Main Authors: Özsoy, Emrah, Kutluhan, Musab Ali, Akyüz, Mehmet, Tokuç, Emre, Ürkmez, Ahmet, Gümrükçü, Gülistan, Öztürk, Metin İshak
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01-06-2021
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in reducing renal injury in ureteral obstruction. Methods Twenty-four Wistar Albino rats were randomized and divided into four groups as the donor ( n  = 6), sham ( n  = 6), saline ( n  = 6), and PRP ( n  = 6). Blood was obtained from the donor group by cardiac puncture and PRP was prepared. 2 cc blood was sampled from other groups to measure blood-urea nitrogen and creatinine levels. Baseline renal scintigraphy was performed. An abdominal midline incision was made and the left ureter was exposed in the sham group. Saline infusion was given to the kidneys of the saline group after left ureteral obstruction, while PRP was given to the PRP group. On postoperative Day 7, control biochemical and scintigraphic evaluations were performed and left nephrectomies were done. Left kidneys were evaluated histopathologically. Results DMSA measurements in the sham group were found to be significantly higher than the saline and PRP groups ( p  = 0.001 and p  = 0.024, respectively). There were no significant differences between the saline and PRP groups ( p  = 0.525 and p  > 0.05, respectively). Histopathologically, no significant difference was observed between the saline and PRP groups ( p  = 0.320), while the scores of the sham group were significantly higher than the saline and PRP groups ( p  = 0.02 and p  = 0.001, respectively). Conclusion Our study results suggest that PRP may be effective in preventing ureteral obstruction-induced renal injury.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0301-1623
1573-2584
DOI:10.1007/s11255-021-02782-1