Synergistic effect of hyperbaric oxygen preconditioning and hydrogen-rich saline in ameliorating rat flap ischemia/reperfusion injury
Wang YB, Xiao YD, Liu YQ, Zhang MZ, Liu YF, Ma XM. · Plast Aesthet Res. 2015;2:332–339.
Study at a glance
Preclinical
Male Sprague-Dawley rats with an epigastric skin-flap ischemia/reperfusion model.
Hydrogen-rich saline at 0.8 mmol/L, hyperbaric-oxygen preconditioning, or their combination. · 0.8 mmol/L hydrogen-rich saline.
Six-hour ischemia/reperfusion protocol; outcomes on postoperative day 3.
Both active interventions favored flap outcomes versus untreated ischemia/reperfusion, and the combined arm was reported as strongest.
Animal evidence only; the combination arm cannot isolate the contribution of H₂.
What kind of evidence is this?
Preclinical
Randomized controlled rat study
Skin, wound and aging research
Other forms
Positive preclinical signal; combined arm strongest.
Tissue survival, perfusion and mechanistic outcomes in rats.
Methods
Male Sprague-Dawley rats with an epigastric skin-flap ischemia/reperfusion model.
50 rats; five groups.
Six-hour ischemia/reperfusion protocol; outcomes on postoperative day 3.
Hydrogen-rich saline at 0.8 mmol/L, hyperbaric-oxygen preconditioning, or their combination.
H₂ dissolved in saline.
0.8 mmol/L hydrogen-rich saline.
Sham, ischemia/reperfusion vehicle, H₂-saline alone, hyperbaric oxygen alone and combined treatment.
Outcomes and reported result
Flap survival and perfusion, apoptosis, caspase-3, pASK1 and Bcl-2/Bax signaling.
Both active interventions favored flap outcomes versus untreated ischemia/reperfusion, and the combined arm was reported as strongest.
The full article methods, intervention, outcomes, positive and null findings, funding and conflict statements were checked.
A reported association, difference or mechanism is not automatically a clinical benefit.
Limitations and applicability
Animal evidence only; the combination arm cannot isolate the contribution of H₂.
The reported rat skin-flap model only.
SYRCLE animal-study tool — preliminary
Some concerns
Random allocation was reported, but concealment and blinded outcome assessment were not established.
Sequence generation checked where reported · Allocation concealment generally unclear · Personnel blinding generally unclear · Outcome-assessor blinding generally unclear · No prospectively registered analysis plan identified
No single-study GRADE certainty rating is assigned. Read how records and evidence assessments are prepared.
Sources and record status
DOI: 10.4103/2347-9264.169499 · DOI: 10.4103/2347-9264.169499
A free publisher or repository full article was checked.
Publisher or repository full article and bibliographic record; checked 10 August 2026.
10 August 2026
Help people check the facts before they buy.
Hydrogenology keeps 665 source-checked records accessible without advertising or product promotion.
Help us correct the recordReport a discrepancy
Send the exact difference between this page and the linked source. The study reference is attached automatically.