Cargando…

Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) as compared to no conditioning on clinical endpoints in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). MATERIAL AND...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sandven, Irene, Eritsland, Jan, Abdelnoor, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7294110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606985
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S249785
_version_ 1783546414885765120
author Sandven, Irene
Eritsland, Jan
Abdelnoor, Michael
author_facet Sandven, Irene
Eritsland, Jan
Abdelnoor, Michael
author_sort Sandven, Irene
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) as compared to no conditioning on clinical endpoints in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Literature was searched up to September 13, 2019, and we identified a total of 13 RCTs. The efficacy of RIC on incidence of clinical events during follow-up was quantified by the rate ratio (RR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI), and we used fixed and random effects models to synthetize the results. Small-study effect was evaluated, and controlled for by the trim-and-fill method. Heterogeneity between studies was examined by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The risk of false-positive results in meta-analysis was evaluated by trial sequential analysis (TSA). RESULTS: Pooled analysis of 13 trials (7183 patients) showed that RIC compared to no conditioning revealed a non-significant risk reduction on endpoint mortality (RR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.56–1.17) during a median follow-up time of 1 year (range: 0.08–3.8) with low heterogeneity (I(2)=16%). Controlling for small-study effect showed no efficacy of RIC (adjusted RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.66–1.59). Pooled effect of RIC on the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) from 11 trials (6996 patients) was non-significant too (RR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.62–1.18), with no observed heterogeneity (I(2)=0%) or small-study effect. A similar lack of efficacy was found in endpoint congestive heart failure (CHF) from 6 trials including 6098 patients (RR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.44–1.15), with moderate heterogeneity (I(2)=30%). TSAs showed that the pooled estimates from the cumulative meta-analyses were true negative with adequate power. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this updated systematic review demonstrates no beneficial effect of RIC on the incidence of clinical endpoint mortality, MI and CHF during a median follow-up of 1 year in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7294110
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72941102020-06-29 Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis Sandven, Irene Eritsland, Jan Abdelnoor, Michael Clin Epidemiol Review OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) as compared to no conditioning on clinical endpoints in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Literature was searched up to September 13, 2019, and we identified a total of 13 RCTs. The efficacy of RIC on incidence of clinical events during follow-up was quantified by the rate ratio (RR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI), and we used fixed and random effects models to synthetize the results. Small-study effect was evaluated, and controlled for by the trim-and-fill method. Heterogeneity between studies was examined by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The risk of false-positive results in meta-analysis was evaluated by trial sequential analysis (TSA). RESULTS: Pooled analysis of 13 trials (7183 patients) showed that RIC compared to no conditioning revealed a non-significant risk reduction on endpoint mortality (RR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.56–1.17) during a median follow-up time of 1 year (range: 0.08–3.8) with low heterogeneity (I(2)=16%). Controlling for small-study effect showed no efficacy of RIC (adjusted RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.66–1.59). Pooled effect of RIC on the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) from 11 trials (6996 patients) was non-significant too (RR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.62–1.18), with no observed heterogeneity (I(2)=0%) or small-study effect. A similar lack of efficacy was found in endpoint congestive heart failure (CHF) from 6 trials including 6098 patients (RR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.44–1.15), with moderate heterogeneity (I(2)=30%). TSAs showed that the pooled estimates from the cumulative meta-analyses were true negative with adequate power. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this updated systematic review demonstrates no beneficial effect of RIC on the incidence of clinical endpoint mortality, MI and CHF during a median follow-up of 1 year in ACS patients undergoing PCI. Dove 2020-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7294110/ /pubmed/32606985 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S249785 Text en © 2020 Sandven et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Review
Sandven, Irene
Eritsland, Jan
Abdelnoor, Michael
Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title_full Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title_fullStr Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title_short Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
title_sort remote ischemic conditioning in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7294110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606985
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S249785
work_keys_str_mv AT sandvenirene remoteischemicconditioninginpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromesasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis
AT eritslandjan remoteischemicconditioninginpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromesasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis
AT abdelnoormichael remoteischemicconditioninginpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromesasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis