Dataset Information

Remote ischemic preconditioning and its role in the prevention of new onset atrial fibrillation post-cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The denouement of remote ischemic preconditioning on new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) post-cardiac surgery is not well-established. An updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials was performed by comparing remote ischemic preconditioning with controls and the outcome of interest was NOAF.

Methods

The systemic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred reporting items for systemic review) and AHA (American Heart Association) guidelines. PubMed database was searched to include relevant randomized control trials from inception to July 2019. We used Mantel-Haenzsel method with random error model to calculate risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I ² test> 50% or ? ² P < .05. Publication bias was visually assessed using a funnel plot.

Results

Twelve randomized control trials were included in the final analysis. Remote ischemic preconditioning did not alter the risk of NOAF post-cardiac surgery [RR: 0.95, CI: 0.83-1.09, P = .48, I ² = 37%, ? ² P = .09].

Conclusion

In conclusion, the present meta-analysis failed to provide any evidence for the beneficial effect of remote ischemic preconditioning in the prevention of NOAF.

SUBMITTER: Kumar A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6898524 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Remote ischemic preconditioning and its role in the prevention of new onset atrial fibrillation post-cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

Kumar Ashish A Kumar Ashish A Singh Harpreet H Shariff Mariam M

Journal of arrhythmia 20191031 6

<h4>Background</h4>The denouement of remote ischemic preconditioning on new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) post-cardiac surgery is not well-established. An updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials was performed by comparing remote ischemic preconditioning with controls and the outcome of interest was NOAF.<h4>Methods</h4>The systemic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred reporting items for systemic review) and AHA (American Heart Association) guidelines<b>.</ ...[more]

PMID: 31844467

Similar Datasets

Project description:Multiple randomized controlled trials of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) prior to cardiac surgery have failed to demonstrate clinical benefit. The aim of this updated meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of RIPC on outcomes following cardiac surgery.Searches of PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were performed for 1970 to December 13, 2015. Randomized controlled trials comparing RIPC with a sham procedure prior to cardiac surgery performed with cardiopulmonary bypass were assessed. All-cause mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), and myocardial infarction were the primary outcomes of interest. We identified 21 trials that randomized 5262 patients to RIPC or a sham procedure prior to undergoing cardiac surgery. The majority of patients were men (72.6%) and the mean or median age ranged from 42.3 to 76.3 years. Of the 9 trials that evaluated mortality, 188 deaths occurred out of a total of 4210 randomized patients, with 96 deaths occurring in 2098 patients (4.6%) randomized to RIPC and 92 deaths occurring in 2112 patients (4.4%) randomized to a sham control procedure, demonstrating no significant reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.987; 95% CI, 0.653-1.492, P=0.95). Twelve studies evaluated AKI in 4209 randomized patients. In these studies, AKI was observed in 516 of 2091 patients (24.7%) undergoing RIPC and in 577 of 2118 patients (27.2%) randomized to a sham procedure. RIPC did not result in a significant reduction in AKI (RR, 0.839; 95% CI, 0.703-1.001 [P=0.052]). In 6 studies consisting of 3799 randomized participants, myocardial infarction occurred in 237 of 1891 patients (12.5%) randomized to RIPC and in 282 of 1908 patients (14.8%) randomized to a sham procedure, resulting in no significant reduction in postoperative myocardial infarction (RR, 0.809; 95% CI, 0.615-1.064 [P=0.13]). A subgroup analysis was performed a priori based on previous studies suggesting that propofol may mitigate the protective benefits of RIPC. Three studies randomized patients undergoing cardiac surgery to RIPC or sham procedure in the absence of propofol anesthesia. Most of these patients were men (60.3%) and the mean or median age ranged from 57.0 to 70.6 years. In this propofol-free subgroup of 434 randomized patients, 71 of 217 patients (32.7%) who underwent RIPC developed AKI compared with 103 of 217 patients (47.5%) treated with a sham procedure. In this cohort, RIPC resulted in a significant reduction in AKI (RR, 0.700; 95% CI, 0.527-0.930 [P=0.014]). In studies of patients who received propofol anesthesia, 445 of 1874 (23.7%) patients randomized to RIPC developed AKI compared with 474 of 1901 (24.9%) who underwent a sham procedure. The RR for AKI was 0.928 (95% CI, 0.781-1.102; P=0.39) for RIPC versus sham. There was no significant interaction between the two subgroups (P=0.098).RIPC does not reduce morbidity or mortality in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. In the subgroup of studies in which propofol was not used, a reduction in AKI was seen, suggesting that propofol may interact with the protective effects of RIPC. Future studies should evaluate RIPC in the absence of propofol anesthesia.

Dataset Information

Remote ischemic preconditioning and its role in the prevention of new onset atrial fibrillation post-cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Remote ischemic preconditioning and its role in the prevention of new onset atrial fibrillation post-cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets