Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Non-cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract

BackgroundRemote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) may mitigate physiological stress related to surgery. There is no clear consensus on conduct of RIPC studies, or whether it is effective. The aim of this study was to (i) assess delivery of RIPC, (ii) identify reported outcomes, (iii) measure effect on key clinical outcomes. MethodsThis review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD:42020180725). EMBASE and Medline databases were searched, and results screened by two reviewers. Full-texts were assessed for eligibility by two reviewers. Data extracted were methods of RIPC and outcomes reported. Meta-analysis of key clinical events was performed using a Mantel-Haenszel random effects model. The TIDieR framework was used to assess intervention reporting, and Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for all studies included. ResultsSearches identified 25 studies; 25 were included in the narrative analysis and 18 in the meta-analysis. RIPC was frequently performed by occluding arm circulation (15/25), at 200 mmHg (9/25), with three cycles of 5 min ischemia and 5 min of reperfusion (16/25). No study fulfilled all 12 TIDieR items (mean score 7.68). Meta-analysis showed no benefit of RIPC on MI (OR 0.71 95% CI 0.48-1.04, I2 = 0%), mortality (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-1.01, I2 = 0%), or acute kidney injury (OR 0.72 95% CI 0.48-1.08). ConclusionsRIPC could be standardized as 200 mmHg pressure in 3 × 5 min on and off cycles. The signal of benefit should be explored in a larger well-designed randomized trial.