Dataset Information

The effect of 1 week of repeated ischaemic leg preconditioning on simulated Keirin cycling performance: a randomised trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Coaches continually seek new ways of doing things and also refine existing techniques to improve sporting performance. Coaches are currently experimenting using ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) over consecutive days in the hope of improving competitive performances. AIMS:First, to quantify the physiological impact of 1?week of IPC on simulated Keirin cycling performance. Second, to investigate if biochemical stress markers are affected over the treatment period. METHODS:Using a randomised, sham-controlled design, 18 active adults undertook seven consecutive days of IPC treatment (4×5?min occlusion/reperfusion) applied to each leg at either 220?mm Hg (treatment, n=9) or 20?mm Hg (sham, n=9). Urinary measures of inflammation, oxidative stress and indirect nitric oxide synthesis were undertaken daily. A simulated Keirin cycling competition (4×30 s Wingate tests) was performed on day 10, with baseline and postintervention cycling VO2max (days 1, 11 and 18) and 30?s Wingate tests (day 2) undertaken for comparison. RESULTS:The treatment group had enhanced mean cycling power (3.4%), while neopterin and biopterin in conjunction with total neopterin were significantly lower (p<0.05) and total biopterin significantly greater (p<0.05) during the simulated Keirin. Aerobic fitness measures significantly improved from baseline to postintervention (VO2peak: 12.8% ?, maximal aerobic power: 18.5% ?). CONCLUSIONS:Seven consecutive days of IPC improved aerobic and anaerobic capacity measures, with modulations in oxidative stress, immune system activation and nitric oxide/catecholamine synthesis.

SUBMITTER: Lindsay A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5530127 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effect of 1 week of repeated ischaemic leg preconditioning on simulated Keirin cycling performance: a randomised trial.

Lindsay Angus A Petersen Carl C Blackwell Gavin G Ferguson Hamish H Parker Greg G Steyn Nina N Gieseg Steven P SP

BMJ open sport & exercise medicine 20170531 1

<h4>Background</h4>Coaches continually seek new ways of doing things and also refine existing techniques to improve sporting performance. Coaches are currently experimenting using ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) over consecutive days in the hope of improving competitive performances.<h4>Aims</h4>First, to quantify the physiological impact of 1 week of IPC on simulated Keirin cycling performance. Second, to investigate if biochemical stress markers are affected over the treatment period.<h4>Metho ...[more]

PMID: 28761713

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite advances in perioperative care, elective major vascular surgical procedures still carry a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is the temporary blocking of blood flow to vascular beds remote from those targeted by surgery. It has the potential to provide local tissue protection from further prolonged periods of ischaemia. However, the efficacy and safety of RIPC in people undergoing major vascular surgery remain unknown. This is an update of a review published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of RIPC versus no RIPC in people undergoing elective major vascular and endovascular surgery.Search methodsThe Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov to 1 April 2022.Selection criteriaWe included all randomised controlled trials that evaluated the role of RIPC in reducing perioperative mortality and morbidities in people undergoing elective major vascular or endovascular surgery.Data collection and analysisWe collected data on the characteristics of the trial, methodological quality, and the remote ischaemic preconditioning stimulus used. Our primary outcome was perioperative mortality, and secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, renal impairment, stroke, hospital stay, limb loss, and operating time or total anaesthetic time. We analysed the data using random-effects models. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) based on an intention-to-treat analysis. In addition, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.Main resultsWe included 14 trials which randomised a total of 1295 participants (age range: 64.5 to 76 years; 84% male; study periods ranged from 2003 to 2019). In general, the included studies were at low to unclear risk of bias for most risk of bias domains. The certainty of evidence of main outcomes was moderate due to imprecision of results, moderate heterogeneity, or possible publication bias. We found that RIPC made no clear difference in perioperative mortality compared with no RIPC (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.40; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 965 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Similarly, we found no clear difference between the two groups for myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.40; I2 = 7%; 11 studies, 1001 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), renal impairment (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.86; I2 = 40%; 12 studies, 1054 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), stroke (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 392 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), limb loss (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.05 to 10.61; I2 = 32%; 3 studies, 322 participants; low-certainty evidence), hospital stay (MD -0.94 day, 95% CI -1.95 to 0.07; I2 = 17%; 7 studies, 569 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and operating time or total anaesthetic time (MD 5.76 minutes, 95% CI -3.25 to 14.76; I2 = 44%; 10 studies, 803 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, compared with no RIPC, RIPC probably leads to little or no difference in perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, renal impairment, stroke, hospital stay, and operating time, and may lead to little or no difference in limb loss in people undergoing elective major vascular and endovascular surgery. Adequately powered and designed randomised studies are needed, focusing in particular on the clinical endpoints and patient-centred outcomes.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate whether remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) prevents myocardial injury in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. DESIGN:Phase II, multicentre, randomised, observer blinded, clinical trial. SETTING:Three Danish university hospitals, 2015-17. PARTICIPANTS:648 patients with cardiovascular risk factors undergoing hip fracture surgery. 286 patients were assigned to RIPC and 287 were assigned to standard practice (control group). INTERVENTION:The RIPC procedure was initiated before surgery with a tourniquet applied to the upper arm and consisted of four cycles of forearm ischaemia for five minutes followed by reperfusion for five minutes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The original primary outcome was myocardial injury within four days of surgery, defined as a peak plasma cardiac troponin I concentration of 45 ng/L or more caused by ischaemia. The revised primary outcome was myocardial injury within four days of surgery, defined as a peak plasma cardiac troponin I concentration of 45 ng/L or more or high sensitive troponin I greater than 24 ng/L (the primary outcome was changed owing to availability of testing). Secondary outcomes were peak plasma troponin I and total troponin I release during the first four days after surgery (cardiac and high sensitive troponin I), perioperative myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all cause mortality within 30 days of surgery, length of postoperative stay, and length of stay in the intensive care unit. Several planned secondary outcomes will be reported elsewhere. RESULTS:573 of the 648 randomised patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean age 79 (SD 10) years; 399 (70%) women). The primary outcome occurred in 25 of 168 (15%) patients in the RIPC group and 45 of 158 (28%) in the control group (odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.76; P=0.003). The revised primary outcome occurred in 57 of 286 patients (20%) in the RIPC group and 90 of 287 (31%) in the control group (0.55, 0.37 to 0.80; P=0.002). Myocardial infarction occurred in 10 patients (3%) in the RIPC group and 21 patients (7%) in the control group (0.46, 0.21 to 0.99; P=0.04). Statistical power was insufficient to draw firm conclusions on differences between groups for the other clinical secondary outcomes (major adverse cardiovascular events, 30 day all cause mortality, length of postoperative stay, and length of stay in the intensive care unit). CONCLUSIONS:RIPC reduced the risk of myocardial injury and infarction after emergency hip fracture surgery. It cannot be concluded that RIPC overall prevents major adverse cardiovascular events after surgery. The findings support larger scale clinical trials to assess longer term clinical outcomes and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02344797.

Project description:BackgroundVascular surgery patients have reduced tissues` blood supply, which may lead to mitochondrial dysfunction and accumulation of acylcarnitines (ACs). It has been suggested that remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has its organ protective effect via promoting mitochondrial function. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of RIPC on the profile of ACs in the vascular surgery patients.MethodsThis is a randomised, sham-controlled, double-blinded, single-centre study. Patients undergoing open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm, surgical lower limb revascularisation surgery or carotid endarterectomy were recruited non-consecutively. The RIPC protocol consisting of 4 cycles of 5 min of ischaemia, followed by 5 min of reperfusion, was applied. A blood pressure cuff was used for RIPC or a sham procedure. Blood was collected preoperatively and approximately 24 h postoperatively. The profile of ACs was analysed using the AbsoluteIDQp180 kit (Biocrates Life Sciences AG, Innsbruck, Austria).ResultsNinety-eight patients were recruited and randomised into the study groups and 45 patients from the RIPC group and 47 patients from the sham group were included in final analysis. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups regarding the changes in C3-OH (p = 0.023)-there was a decrease (- 0.007 µmol/L, ± 0.020 µmol/L, p = 0.0233) in the RIPC group and increase (0.002 µmol/L, ± 0.015 µmol/L, p = 0.481) in the sham group. Additionally, a decrease from baseline to 24 h after surgery (p < 0.05) was detected both in the sham and the RIPC group in the levels of following ACs: C2, C8, C10, C10:1, C12, C12:1, C14:1, C14:2, C16, C16:1, C18, C18:1, C18:2. In the sham group, there was an increase (p < 0.05) in the levels of C0 (carnitine) and a decrease in the level of C18:1-OH. In the RIPC group, a decrease (p < 0.05) was noted in the levels of C3-OH, C3-DC (C4-OH), C6:1, C9, C10:2.ConclusionsIt can be concluded that RIPC may have an effect on the levels of ACs and might therefore have protective effects on mitochondria in the vascular surgery patients. Further larger studies conducted on homogenous populations are needed to make more definite conclusions about the effect of RIPC on the metabolism of ACs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov database, NCT02689414. Registered 24 February 2016-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02689414.

Dataset Information

The effect of 1 week of repeated ischaemic leg preconditioning on simulated Keirin cycling performance: a randomised trial.

Publications

The effect of 1 week of repeated ischaemic leg preconditioning on simulated Keirin cycling performance: a randomised trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets