Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus no remote ischaemic preconditioning for vascular and endovascular surgical procedures

Liang, Fuxiang; Liu, Shidong; Liu, Guangzu; Liu, Hongxu; Song, Bing; Yao, Liang; Wang, Qi

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008472.pub3

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been shown that RIPC acts in two stages to protect endothelial cells against ischemia damage in arterial vessels, with an initial phase engaged immediately and lasting up to four hours and an additional phase beginning 24 h after RIPC stimulation and lasting for at least 48 h [ 2 ]. While the impact of RIPC has been repeatedly demonstrated in various organs and tissues in animal models, the latest meta-analyses of patients undergoing vascular and endovascular surgical procedures have not provided statistically significant results in clinical trials [ 7 , 8 ]. This controversy is most probably caused by variability in individual responses and heterogeneity of confounding factors in clinical studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of RIPC on the Metabolomical Profile during Lower Limb Digital Subtraction Angiography: A Randomized Controlled Trial

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) has demonstrated protective effects in patients with lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD) undergoing digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and/or percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). This study aimed to investigate the impact of RIPC on the metabolomical profile of LEAD patients undergoing these procedures and to elucidate its potential underlying mechanisms. A total of 100 LEAD patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the RIPC group (n = 46) or the sham group (n = 54). Blood samples were drawn before and 24 h after intervention. Targeted metabolomics analysis was performed using the AbsoluteIDQ p180 Kit, and changes in metabolite concentrations were compared between the groups. The RIPC group demonstrated significantly different dynamics in nine metabolites compared to the sham group, which generally showed a decrease in metabolite concentrations. The impacted metabolites included glutamate, taurine, the arginine-dimethyl-amide-to-arginine ratio, lysoPC a C24:0, lysoPC a C28:0, lysoPC a C26:1, PC aa C38:1, PC ae C30:2, and PC ae C44:3. RIPC exhibited a ‘stabilization’ effect, maintaining metabolite levels amidst ischemia-reperfusion injuries, suggesting its role in enhancing metabolic control. This may improve outcomes for LEAD patients. However, additional studies are needed to definitively establish causal relationships among these metabolic changes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%