• Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg · May 2012

    Review

    Is remote ischaemic preconditioning of benefit to patients undergoing cardiac surgery?

    • Jakub Marczak, Rafal Nowicki, Julita Kulbacka, and Jolanta Saczko.
    • Department of Cardiac Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland. kubamarczak@gmail.com
    • Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 May 1;14(5):634-9.

    AbstractA best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is of benefit to patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Altogether, more than 264 papers were found using the reported search, 16 of which represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that RIPC is a safe protocol which could potentially be used in cardiac surgery to provide additional cardiac protection against ischaemia reperfusion injury, although it may not be appropriate for patients on K(+) ATPase channel blockers (sulphonylureas) as they seem to eliminate the effect of RIPC. In our study, we found two meta-analyses of cardiac surgery with or without RIPC. Both unequivocally showed 0.81 and 0.74 standardized mean reduction in myocardial necrosis markers in patients receiving RIPC and cardiac or vascular surgery. No difference in perioperative myocardial infarction incidence or 30-day mortality were found. In adult cardiac surgery, we found 11 randomized control trials (RCTs) ranging in size from 45 to 162 patients. Two representative studies reported no difference in postoperative cardiac troponin I concentration in RIPC vs. controls. In one of the studies (CABG ± RIPC) no additional benefit could have been observed for RIPC regarding intra-aortic balloon pump usage (controls 8.5 vs. RIPC 7.5%), inotropic support (39 vs. 50%) or vasoconstrictor usage (66 vs. 64%). On the other hand, in the other study [CABG ± AVR (aortic valve replacement) ± RIPC] significant reduction of troponin I at 8 h postoperatively (controls, 2.90 µg/l vs. RIPC, 2.54 µg/l, P = 0.043) was shown. Marked reduction in cardiac necrosis markers was also found in several smaller RCTs concerning coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients receiving RIPC preoperatively: with cold crystalloid cardioplegia (44.5% reduction), with cross-clamping and fibrillation (43% reduction) and with cold blood cardioplegia (42.4% reduction). The proof of concept trials summarized here give some early evidence that RIPC may potentially provide some reduction in myocardial injury. If confirmed, in future clinical studies this technique may one day lead to a method to reduce reperfusion injury in clinical practice.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.