• Huan Ouyang, Meng Zhou, Jiahui Xu, Cuifu Fang, Zhiwei Zhong, Yu Zhou, Jiasheng Xu, and Weimin Zhou.
• Department of Vascular Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, People's Republic of China.
• Ann Vasc Surg. 2020 Jan 1; 62: 452-462.

BackgroundWhether remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC), through several cycles of ischemia-reperfusion, can generate endogenous protective substances to protect patients undergoing elective major vascular surgery remains unclear. The results derived from many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been discrepant.MethodsPubMed (1966 to May 2018) and EMBASE (1966 to May 2018) databases were searched to identify all published RCTs that assessed the effect of RIPC in patients undergoing elective major vascular surgery. Then, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to merge the outcomes of RIPC procedures from each RCT, which included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), acute kidney injury (AKI), and/or new-onset arrhythmia.ResultsA total of 909 patients were enrolled from 10 eligible studies that were conducted from 2007 through 2016. A fixed effect model was utilized in this study to pool each effect size. Pooled analyses of all RCTs showed that RIPC did not reduce the incidence of all-cause mortality (pooled risk ratio [RR] 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-2.92, P = 0.56), MI (pooled RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.48-1.22, P = 0.38), AKI (pooled RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68-1.27, P = 0.10), or new-onset arrhythmia (pooled RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.83-2.60, P = 0.52) compared with the control treatment. The publication bias detected by Begg's test was low.ConclusionsThere is no prominent evidence to support the hypothesis that RIPC can provide perioperative protection to patients undergoing elective major vascular surgery. Therefore, the routine use of RIPC to reduce the incidence of perioperative complications of these operations may not be recommended.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

32 keywords...

hide…