*Corresponding author: Jochen D Schipke, Research Group Experimental Surgery, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany, Tel: +49 2118114996; Fax: +49 2118115334; E-mail: j.schipke@gmx.org Citation: Buchinger-Kähler V, Stoldt VR, Muth T, Schipke JD (2016) Function and Viability of Vessels in Different Preservation Solutions-An Experimental Study on Human Great Saphenous Veins. J Angiol Vasc Surg 1: 003 Received: October 29, 2015; Accepted: March 25, 2016; Published: April 08, 2016 Introduction In the last decades blood vessel transplantation and preservation have grown steadily in importance. Although storage of those vessels induces injury, mechanisms of injury due to cold storage have only recently been extensively studied. Injury due to cold storage and prevention from injury have already been exhibited for corneal cells, cultured endothelial cells, hepatocytes, rat mesenteric artery, segments of rat and pig aorta and lung epithelial cells [1-3]. Te same is true for the human internal thoracic artery [4]. On the other hand, preservation solutions themselves can develop an inherent toxicity upon rewarming [5-7]. A number of studies have shown that hypothermia injury results from a growing pool of redox-active iron [8,9]. Te iron mediates the formation of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) which in turn lead to lipid peroxidation, changes in mitochondria, and fnally to cell death [10]. Te rewarming when the tissue is transplanted exacerbates this process while iron chelators were shown to ameliorate the damage [1]. Presently used preservation solutions, developed in the early 1980’s, do not take cold-induced damage into account. Tese older solutions include Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate (HTK) solution (Custodiol) and University of Wisconsin solution (Viaspan). HTK solution was the basis of the newer Tissue Protection (TiProtec) solution that was specially developed [4] for the preservation of blood vessels and therefore contains iron chelators. Despite the growing need for vascular transplants, methods of preservation are not stringently established. Te necessity for a preservation solution that is optimized for blood vessels becomes apparent from a recent retrospective study [11], which reports on a re-occlusion rate of 25% 12-18 months afer an aorto-coronary bypass operation. Causes of this problem are damage during preparation, unfavorable conditions of infow or outfow in the region of the anastomosis, turbulences if vessel diameter is too small, and damage to the endothelium [12]. Te protection of endothelial function is particularly important in preventing postoperative thrombosis and stenosis [13]. Some authors [14,15] view transplant failure as the long-term consequence of intima hyperplasia, which results from multifactorial damage to the endothelium. Buchinger-Kähler V, et al., J Angiol Vasc Surg 2016, 1: 003 DOI: 10.24966/AVS-7397/100003 HSOA Journal of Angiology & Vascular Surgery Original Article Verena Buchinger-Kähler 1,2 , Volker R Stoldt 3 , Thomas Muth 4 and Jochen D Schipke 1 * 1 Research Group Experimental Surgery, Department of Thoracic and Car- diovascular Surgery, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany 2 Department of Plastic Surgery, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Centre, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany 3 Department of Hemostasis and Transfusion Medicine, Heinrich-Heine-Uni- versity Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany 4 Institute of Occupational Medicine and Social Medicine, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany Function and Viability of Ves- sels in Different Preservation Solutions - An Experimental Study on Human Great Saphe- nous Veins Abstract Objective Great Saphenous Veins (SVs) are widely used in coronary and in non-coronary surgery, and the need for vascular transplants is increasing. In older pre¬servation solutions, hypothermia leads to damage induced by reactive oxygen species. Iron chelators in the newer Tissue Protection (TiProtec) solution shall par¬ticularly protect vessels by preventing from that damage. It was the aim to compare three preservation solutions to maintain function and viability of human SVs. Methods Vein segments were randomly assigned to Krebs-Henseleit Buffer (KHB), Viaspan (UW), or TiProtec. Contraction/relaxation in organ baths was assessed at 3, 24, 48 and 72h after removal. The protocol included three steps: receptor-independent contraction (KCl: 80μM), receptor-dependent contraction (PE: ≤30μM), endothelium-dependent relaxation (ACh: ≤20μM). Morphology: Vein segments were incubated with propidium iodide and 5-chlorometh- ylfuorescein diacetate. Viability was assessed with fuorescence using laser scanning microscopy. Results KHB was inappropriate after only 3h. In TiProtec, SVs contraction/relaxation had increased further at 72h, but not in both other groups. More necrosis was found in KHB SVs than in UW or TiProtec at 3h. More viable cells were found in UW and in TiProtec SVs on day-1, while only few cells were viable in KHB on day-10. Summary and conclusion Even short storage of SVs in KHB is deleterious. UW preserved func¬tion better over time. The best functional and morphological results yielded TiProtec over time, and the amount of viable cells correlated with function. TiProtec seems a promising alternative for short- and mid-term hypothermic vein preservation. Keywords: Hypothermia; Iron chelators; Preservation; Reactive oxygen species; Transplantation; Vessel