Cargando…
Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study
AIMS: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a robust cardioprotective intervention in preclinical studies. To establish a working and efficacious RIPC protocol in our laboratories, we performed randomized, blinded in vivo studies in three study centres in rats, with various RIPC protocols. To v...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10262179/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36718529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvad024 |
_version_ | 1785058017588281344 |
---|---|
author | Sayour, Nabil V Brenner, Gábor B Makkos, András Kiss, Bernadett Kovácsházi, Csenger Gergely, Tamás G Aukrust, Sverre Groever Tian, Huimin Zenkl, Viktória Gömöri, Kamilla Szabados, Tamara Bencsik, Péter Heinen, Andre Schulz, Rainer Baxter, Gary F Zuurbier, Coert J Vokó, Zoltán Ferdinandy, Péter Giricz, Zoltán |
author_facet | Sayour, Nabil V Brenner, Gábor B Makkos, András Kiss, Bernadett Kovácsházi, Csenger Gergely, Tamás G Aukrust, Sverre Groever Tian, Huimin Zenkl, Viktória Gömöri, Kamilla Szabados, Tamara Bencsik, Péter Heinen, Andre Schulz, Rainer Baxter, Gary F Zuurbier, Coert J Vokó, Zoltán Ferdinandy, Péter Giricz, Zoltán |
author_sort | Sayour, Nabil V |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a robust cardioprotective intervention in preclinical studies. To establish a working and efficacious RIPC protocol in our laboratories, we performed randomized, blinded in vivo studies in three study centres in rats, with various RIPC protocols. To verify that our experimental settings are in good alignment with in vivo rat studies showing cardioprotection by limb RIPC, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. In addition, we investigated the importance of different study parameters. METHODS AND RESULTS: Male Wistar rats were subjected to 20–45 min cardiac ischaemia followed by 120 min reperfusion with or without preceding RIPC by 3 or 4 × 5−5 min occlusion/reperfusion of one or two femoral vessels by clamping, tourniquet, or pressure cuff. RIPC did not reduce infarct size (IS), microvascular obstruction, or arrhythmias at any study centres. Systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on in vivo rat models of myocardial ischaemia/reperfusion injury with limb RIPC showed that RIPC reduces IS by 21.28% on average. In addition, the systematic review showed methodological heterogeneity and insufficient reporting of study parameters in a high proportion of studies. CONCLUSION: We report for the first time the lack of cardioprotection by RIPC in rats, assessed in individually randomized, blinded in vivo studies, involving three study centres, using different RIPC protocols. These results are in discrepancy with the meta-analysis of similar in vivo rat studies; however, no specific methodological reason could be identified by the systematic review, probably due to the overall insufficient reporting of several study parameters that did not improve over the past two decades. These results urge for publication of more well-designed and well-reported studies, irrespective of the outcome, which are required for preclinical reproducibility, and the development of clinically translatable cardioprotective interventions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10262179 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102621792023-06-15 Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study Sayour, Nabil V Brenner, Gábor B Makkos, András Kiss, Bernadett Kovácsházi, Csenger Gergely, Tamás G Aukrust, Sverre Groever Tian, Huimin Zenkl, Viktória Gömöri, Kamilla Szabados, Tamara Bencsik, Péter Heinen, Andre Schulz, Rainer Baxter, Gary F Zuurbier, Coert J Vokó, Zoltán Ferdinandy, Péter Giricz, Zoltán Cardiovasc Res Original Article AIMS: Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a robust cardioprotective intervention in preclinical studies. To establish a working and efficacious RIPC protocol in our laboratories, we performed randomized, blinded in vivo studies in three study centres in rats, with various RIPC protocols. To verify that our experimental settings are in good alignment with in vivo rat studies showing cardioprotection by limb RIPC, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. In addition, we investigated the importance of different study parameters. METHODS AND RESULTS: Male Wistar rats were subjected to 20–45 min cardiac ischaemia followed by 120 min reperfusion with or without preceding RIPC by 3 or 4 × 5−5 min occlusion/reperfusion of one or two femoral vessels by clamping, tourniquet, or pressure cuff. RIPC did not reduce infarct size (IS), microvascular obstruction, or arrhythmias at any study centres. Systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on in vivo rat models of myocardial ischaemia/reperfusion injury with limb RIPC showed that RIPC reduces IS by 21.28% on average. In addition, the systematic review showed methodological heterogeneity and insufficient reporting of study parameters in a high proportion of studies. CONCLUSION: We report for the first time the lack of cardioprotection by RIPC in rats, assessed in individually randomized, blinded in vivo studies, involving three study centres, using different RIPC protocols. These results are in discrepancy with the meta-analysis of similar in vivo rat studies; however, no specific methodological reason could be identified by the systematic review, probably due to the overall insufficient reporting of several study parameters that did not improve over the past two decades. These results urge for publication of more well-designed and well-reported studies, irrespective of the outcome, which are required for preclinical reproducibility, and the development of clinically translatable cardioprotective interventions. Oxford University Press 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10262179/ /pubmed/36718529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvad024 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Original Article Sayour, Nabil V Brenner, Gábor B Makkos, András Kiss, Bernadett Kovácsházi, Csenger Gergely, Tamás G Aukrust, Sverre Groever Tian, Huimin Zenkl, Viktória Gömöri, Kamilla Szabados, Tamara Bencsik, Péter Heinen, Andre Schulz, Rainer Baxter, Gary F Zuurbier, Coert J Vokó, Zoltán Ferdinandy, Péter Giricz, Zoltán Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title | Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title_full | Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title_fullStr | Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title_full_unstemmed | Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title_short | Cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
title_sort | cardioprotective efficacy of limb remote ischaemic preconditioning in rats: discrepancy between a meta-analysis and a three-centre in vivo study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10262179/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36718529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvad024 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sayournabilv cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT brennergaborb cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT makkosandras cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT kissbernadett cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT kovacshazicsenger cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT gergelytamasg cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT aukrustsverregroever cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT tianhuimin cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT zenklviktoria cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT gomorikamilla cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT szabadostamara cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT bencsikpeter cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT heinenandre cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT schulzrainer cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT baxtergaryf cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT zuurbiercoertj cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT vokozoltan cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT ferdinandypeter cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy AT giriczzoltan cardioprotectiveefficacyoflimbremoteischaemicpreconditioninginratsdiscrepancybetweenametaanalysisandathreecentreinvivostudy |