Differential efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning in anterior versus posterior circulation stroke: A prespecified secondary analysis of the RICAMIS trial

Abstract

AbstractBackground and PurposeThe benefit of remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) in acute moderate ischaemic stroke has been demonstrated by the Remote Ischaemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischaemic Stroke (RICAMIS) study. This prespecified exploratory analysis aimed to determine whether there was a difference of RIC efficacy in anterior versus posterior circulation stroke based on RICAMIS data.MethodsIn this analysis, eligible patients presenting within 48 h of stroke onset were divided into two groups: anterior circulation stroke (ACS) and posterior circulation stroke (PCS) groups. The primary endpoint was an excellent functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0–1 at 90 days.ResultsIn all, 1013 patients were included in the final analysis, including 642 with ACS and 371 with PCS. Compared with the control group, RIC was significantly associated with an increased proportion of mRS scores 0–1 within 90 days in the PCS group (unadjusted odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.0–2.4, p = 0.04; adjusted odds ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.2–3.3, p = 0.005), but not in the ACS group (p = 0.29). Similar results were found regarding secondary outcomes including mRS score 0–2 at 90 days, mRS distribution at 90 days and change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at day 12 from baseline. However, there was no significant interaction effect between stroke location and intervention on the primary outcome (pinteraction = 0.21).ConclusionAmongst patients with acute PCS who are not candidates for reperfusion treatment, RIC may be associated with a higher probability of improved functional outcomes. These findings need to be validated in prospective trials.