Home > DARE Reviews > The role of remote ischemic...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].

The role of remote ischemic preconditioning in organ protection after cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis

Review published: 2014.

Bibliographic details: Haji Mohd Yasin NA, Herbison P, Saxena P, Praporski S, Konstantinov IE.  The role of remote ischemic preconditioning in organ protection after cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis. Journal of Surgical Research 2014; 186(1): 207-216. [PubMed: 24135377]

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) appears to protect distant organs from ischemia-reperfusion injury. We undertook meta-analysis of clinical studies to evaluate the effects of RIPC on organ protection and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

METHODS: A review of evidence for cardiac, renal, and pulmonary protection after RIPC was performed. We also did meta-regressions on RIPC variables, such as duration of ischemia, cuff pressure, and timing of application of preconditioning. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and mortality at 30 days.

RESULTS: Randomized control trials (n = 25) were included in the study for quantitative analysis of cardiac (n = 16), renal (n = 6), and pulmonary (n = 3) protection. RIPC provided statistically significant cardiac protection (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.15, -0.39; Z = 3.98; P < 0.0001) and on subgroup analysis, the protective effect remained consistent for all types of cardiac surgical procedures. However, there was no evidence of renal protection (SMD, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53, 1.02; Z = 1.81; P = 0.07) or pulmonary protection (SMD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.56, 0.50; Z = 0.12; P = 0.91). There was no statistical difference in the short-term clinical outcomes between the RIPC and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS: RIPC provides cardiac protection, but there is no evidence of renal or pulmonary protection in patients undergoing cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass. Larger multicenter trials are required to define the role of RIPC in surgical practice.

Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2014 University of York.

PMID: 24135377

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...