Cargando…

Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been investigated as a simple intervention to potentially mitigate the ischaemic effect of the surgical insult and reduce postoperative morbidity. This review systematically evaluates the effect of RIPC on morbidity, including duration of hospi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Papadopoulou, Aikaterini, Dickinson, Matthew, Samuels, Theophilus L., Heiss, Christian, Forni, Lui, Creagh-Brown, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10084674/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038219
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-023-00297-0
_version_ 1785021789421699072
author Papadopoulou, Aikaterini
Dickinson, Matthew
Samuels, Theophilus L.
Heiss, Christian
Forni, Lui
Creagh-Brown, Ben
author_facet Papadopoulou, Aikaterini
Dickinson, Matthew
Samuels, Theophilus L.
Heiss, Christian
Forni, Lui
Creagh-Brown, Ben
author_sort Papadopoulou, Aikaterini
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been investigated as a simple intervention to potentially mitigate the ischaemic effect of the surgical insult and reduce postoperative morbidity. This review systematically evaluates the effect of RIPC on morbidity, including duration of hospital stay and parameters reflective of cardiac, renal, respiratory, and hepatic dysfunction following non-cardiac non-vascular (NCNV) surgery. METHODS: The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from their inception date to November 2021. Studies investigating the effect of local preconditioning or postconditioning were excluded. Methodological quality and risk of bias were determined according to the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). Calculation of the odds ratios and a random effects model was used for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences or standardised mean differences as appropriate were used for continuous outcomes. The primary outcomes of interest were cardiac and renal morbidity, and the secondary outcomes included other organ function parameters and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: A systematic review of the published literature identified 36 randomised controlled trials. There was no significant difference in postoperative troponin or acute kidney injury. RIPC was associated with lower postoperative serum creatinine (9 studies, 914 patients, mean difference (MD) - 3.81 µmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 6.79 to - 0.83, p = 0.01, I(2) = 5%) and lower renal stress biomarker (neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), 5 studies, 379 patients, standardized mean difference (SMD) - 0.66, 95% CI - 1.27 to - 0.06, p = 0.03, I(2) = 86%). RIPC was also associated with improved oxygenation (higher P(a)O(2)/F(i)O(2), 5 studies, 420 patients, MD 51.51 mmHg, 95% CI 27.32 to 75.69, p < 0.01, I(2) = 89%), lower biomarker of oxidative stress (malondialdehyde (MDA), 3 studies, 100 patients, MD - 1.24 µmol/L, 95% CI - 2.4 to - 0.07, p = 0.04, I(2) = 91%)) and shorter length of hospital stay (15 studies, 2110 patients, MD - 0.99 days, 95% CI - 1.75 to - 0.23, p = 0.01, I(2) = 88%). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis did not show an improvement in the primary outcomes of interest with the use of RIPC. RIPC was associated with a small improvement in certain surrogate parameters of organ function and small reduction in hospital length of stay. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies addressing individual outcomes and the considerable heterogeneity identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019129503. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13741-023-00297-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10084674
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100846742023-04-11 Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis Papadopoulou, Aikaterini Dickinson, Matthew Samuels, Theophilus L. Heiss, Christian Forni, Lui Creagh-Brown, Ben Perioper Med (Lond) Review BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been investigated as a simple intervention to potentially mitigate the ischaemic effect of the surgical insult and reduce postoperative morbidity. This review systematically evaluates the effect of RIPC on morbidity, including duration of hospital stay and parameters reflective of cardiac, renal, respiratory, and hepatic dysfunction following non-cardiac non-vascular (NCNV) surgery. METHODS: The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from their inception date to November 2021. Studies investigating the effect of local preconditioning or postconditioning were excluded. Methodological quality and risk of bias were determined according to the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). Calculation of the odds ratios and a random effects model was used for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences or standardised mean differences as appropriate were used for continuous outcomes. The primary outcomes of interest were cardiac and renal morbidity, and the secondary outcomes included other organ function parameters and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: A systematic review of the published literature identified 36 randomised controlled trials. There was no significant difference in postoperative troponin or acute kidney injury. RIPC was associated with lower postoperative serum creatinine (9 studies, 914 patients, mean difference (MD) - 3.81 µmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 6.79 to - 0.83, p = 0.01, I(2) = 5%) and lower renal stress biomarker (neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), 5 studies, 379 patients, standardized mean difference (SMD) - 0.66, 95% CI - 1.27 to - 0.06, p = 0.03, I(2) = 86%). RIPC was also associated with improved oxygenation (higher P(a)O(2)/F(i)O(2), 5 studies, 420 patients, MD 51.51 mmHg, 95% CI 27.32 to 75.69, p < 0.01, I(2) = 89%), lower biomarker of oxidative stress (malondialdehyde (MDA), 3 studies, 100 patients, MD - 1.24 µmol/L, 95% CI - 2.4 to - 0.07, p = 0.04, I(2) = 91%)) and shorter length of hospital stay (15 studies, 2110 patients, MD - 0.99 days, 95% CI - 1.75 to - 0.23, p = 0.01, I(2) = 88%). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis did not show an improvement in the primary outcomes of interest with the use of RIPC. RIPC was associated with a small improvement in certain surrogate parameters of organ function and small reduction in hospital length of stay. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies addressing individual outcomes and the considerable heterogeneity identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019129503. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13741-023-00297-0. BioMed Central 2023-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10084674/ /pubmed/37038219 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-023-00297-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Papadopoulou, Aikaterini
Dickinson, Matthew
Samuels, Theophilus L.
Heiss, Christian
Forni, Lui
Creagh-Brown, Ben
Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning on outcomes following non-cardiac non-vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10084674/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038219
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-023-00297-0
work_keys_str_mv AT papadopoulouaikaterini efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dickinsonmatthew efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT samuelstheophilusl efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT heisschristian efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fornilui efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT creaghbrownben efficacyofremoteischaemicpreconditioningonoutcomesfollowingnoncardiacnonvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis