Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Human Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Author:

Rahman Ishtiaq A.1,Mascaro Jorge G.1,Steeds Rick P.1,Frenneaux Michael P.1,Nightingale Peter1,Gosling Peter1,Townsend Peter1,Townend John N.1,Green David1,Bonser Robert S.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery (I.A.R., J.G.M., R.S.B.) and Department of Cardiology (R.P.S., J.N.T.), University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom; the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine (M.P.F., R.S.B.), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility (P.N.), Birmingham, United Kingdom; and the Department of Clinical Biochemistry (P.G.) and Department of Anesthetics (P.T., D.G.), University Hospital...

Abstract

Background— We assessed whether remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) improves myocardial, renal, and lung protection after on-pump coronary surgery. Methods and Results— This was a single-center, prospective, randomized (1:1), placebo-controlled trial. Patients, investigators, anesthetists, surgeons, and critical care teams were blinded to group allocation. Subjects received RIPC (or placebo) stimuli (×3 upper limb (or dummy arm), 5-minute cycles of 200 mm Hg cuff inflation/deflation) before aortic clamping. Anesthesia, perfusion, cardioplegia, and surgical techniques were standardized. The primary end point was 48-hour area under the curve (AUC) troponin T (cTnT) release. Secondary end points were 6-hour and peak cTnT, ECG changes, cardiac index, inotrope and vasoconstrictor use, renal dysfunction, and lung injury. Hospital survival was 99.4%. Comparing placebo and RIPC, median (interquartile range) AUC 48-hour cTnT (ng/mL −1 /48 h −1 ); 28 (19, 39) versus 30 (22, 38), 6-hour cTnT (ng/mL −1 ); 0.93(0.59, 1.35) versus 1.01(0.72, 1.43), peak cTnT (ng/mL −1 ); 1.02 (0.74, 1.44) versus 1.04 (0.78, 1.51), de novo left bundle-branch block (4% versus 0%) and Q waves (5.3% versus 5.5%), serial cardiac indices, intraaortic balloon pump usage (8.5% versus 7.5%), inotrope (39% versus 50%) and vasoconstrictor usage (66% versus 64%) were not different. Dialysis requirement (1.2% versus 3.8%), peak creatinine (median [interquartile range], 1.2 mg/dL −1 (1.1, 1.4) versus 1.2 (1.0, 1.4)), and AUC urinary albumin-creatinine ratios 69 (40, 112) versus 58 (32, 85) were not different. Intubation times; median (interquartile range), 937 minutes(766, 1402) versus 895(675, 1180), 6-hour; 278 (210, 338) versus 270 (218, 323) and 12-hour pO 2 :FiO 2 ratios 255 (195, 323) versus 263 (210, 308) were similar. Conclusions— In contrast to prior smaller studies, RIPC did not reduce troponin release, improve hemodynamics, or enhance renal or lung protection. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.ukcrn.org.uk. Unique identifier: 4659.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3