Hydrogenology
Hydrogenology editorial study record

Profiling molecular changes induced by hydrogen treatment of lung allografts prior to procurement

Tanaka Y, Shigemura N, Kawamura T, Noda K, Isse K, Stolz DB, Billiar TR, Toyoda Y, Bermudez CA, Lyons-Weiler J, Nakao A. · Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2012;425(4):873–879.

PreclinicalInhaled H₂Published 2012
Study record, not medical adviceThis page reports one source and Hydrogenology’s source-text extraction. It does not establish that molecular hydrogen is effective, safe or appropriate for any person. Human, animal and laboratory evidence must not be treated as equivalent.
Source and classification

What kind of evidence is this?

Evidence stream

Preclinical

Reported design

Controlled donor-rat ventilation and cold-storage mechanistic study

Research topic

Respiratory health

Administration classification

Inhaled H₂

Study result signal

Not reported in this record.

Outcome type

Not reported in this record.

Reported in the source

Methods at a glance

Population or model

Lewis rat donor lungs mechanically ventilated before procurement and four hours of cold preservation; graft tissue was analyzed before implantation.

Sample

The article does not provide one overall animal total. Outcome-specific molecular assays generally used n=4 per group; selected protein/MAPK experiments used n=3 per group.

Duration

Three-hour donor ventilation followed by procurement and four hours of cold storage; selected reperfusion-linked protein assays were also described.

Intervention

Mechanical ventilation of donor rats for three hours with 2% H₂ and 98% O₂ before lung procurement and four-hour cold Perfadex storage.

Hydrogen form

2% H₂ with 98% O₂ — not Brown's gas because the H₂:O₂ proportions were not 2:1.

H₂ specification

Gas concentrations were explicit, but supply flow was not reported. Ventilator tidal volume and respiratory rate do not establish the delivered source flow and are not used to infer mL/min.

H₂ flow

Not reported — gas-supply flow is absent.

O₂ delivered with H₂

98% O₂; mL/min flow not reported because gas-supply flow is absent.

Comparator

Three-hour ventilation with 2% N₂ and 98% O₂; a sham group received five minutes of 100% O₂ before immediate lung removal.

Reported, not endorsed

Outcomes and reported result

Outcomes measured

Gene-array expression, confirmatory RT-PCR, surfactant-related proteins, lamellar bodies, ATP-synthase transcripts, tissue ATP, HSP70, C/EBP transcription factors and MAPK signaling.

Reported result

H₂ altered 229 array genes, with increases in several surfactant-, ATP-synthase- and stress-response measures and decreases in selected genes/proteins such as PLUNC. No obvious histopathological differences were seen before implantation; this experiment primarily examined mechanisms and did not itself test transplant function or recipient survival.

Results-extraction completeness

The complete free PMC article was checked for ventilation conditions, outcome-specific samples, array and validation findings, the histopathology null observation, funding and available disclosures.

A reported association, difference or mechanism is not automatically a clinical benefit. Null findings, outcome type, study design and precision all matter.

Interpretation limits

Cautions and applicability

Design and reporting cautions

Small outcome-specific rat samples, no one total sample reported, mechanism-focused gene-array work with many comparisons, oxygen-rich carrier, no gas-supply flow, tissue assessed mainly before implantation and no recipient clinical outcomes in this article. NIH and departmental support was reported; no explicit conflict statement was identified, so absence is not inferred.

Applies directly to

Mechanistic donor-lung study in rats; it does not establish benefit or safety in human lung transplantation.

Preliminary appraisal framework

Not reported in this record.

Preliminary risk-of-bias status

Not reported in this record.

Appraisal rationale

Not reported in this record.

No single-study GRADE certainty rating is assigned. Certainty is assessed by important outcome across a complete eligible evidence set, not by attaching a final grade to one source.

Provenance

Sources and record status

Identifiers

PMID: 22902635 · DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.005

Publisher access

Free full article in PubMed Central.

Extraction basis

Complete PMC article and PubMed metadata; full-text extraction checked 9 August 2026.

Record revision

2026-08-10