9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Remote Ischemic Preconditioning to Prevent Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the influence of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) on acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery showed inconsistent results. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of RIPC on AKI after cardiac surgery.

          Methods: Relevant studies were obtained by search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane's Library databases. A random-effect model was used to pool the results. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to determine the source of heterogeneity.

          Results: Twenty-two RCTs with 5,389 patients who received cardiac surgery −2,702 patients in the RIPC group and 2,687 patients in the control group—were included. Moderate heterogeneity was detected ( p for Cochrane's Q test = 0.03, I 2 = 40%). Pooled results showed that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI compared with control [odds ratio (OR): 0.76, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.61–0.94, p = 0.01]. Results limited to on-pump surgery (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.95, p = 0.01) or studies with acute RIPC (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.63–0.97, p = 0.03) showed consistent results. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses indicated that study characteristics, including study design, country, age, gender, diabetic status, surgery type, use of propofol or volatile anesthetics, cross-clamp time, RIPC protocol, definition of AKI, and sample size did not significantly affect the outcome of AKI. Results of stratified analysis showed that RIPC significantly reduced the risk of mild-to-moderate AKI that did not require renal replacement therapy (RRT, OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60–0.96, p = 0.02) but did not significantly reduce the risk of severe AKI that required RRT in patients after cardiac surgery (OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.50–1.07, p = 0.11).

          Conclusions: Current evidence supports RIPC as an effective strategy to prevent AKI after cardiac surgery, which seems to be mainly driven by the reduced mild-to-moderate AKI events that did not require RRT. Efforts are needed to determine the influences of patient characteristics, procedure, perioperative drugs, and RIPC protocol on the outcome.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

              The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Cardiovasc Med
                Front Cardiovasc Med
                Front. Cardiovasc. Med.
                Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2297-055X
                18 March 2021
                2021
                : 8
                : 601470
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children's Hospital, Jinan University , Guangzhou, China
                [2] 2Center for Cardiac Intensive Care, Beijing Anzhen Hospital , Beijing, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Sarah Longnus, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Pradeep Narayan, Rabindranath Tagore International Institute of Cardiac Sciences (RTIICS), India; Maria Nieves Sanz, Bern University Hospital, Switzerland

                *Correspondence: Zigang Liu liuzigangdoc@ 123456163.com

                This article was submitted to Heart Surgery, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work

                Article
                10.3389/fcvm.2021.601470
                8012491
                33816572
                c6ae910c-e4d0-4dfe-aa1b-741a425a7d57
                Copyright © 2021 Liu, Zhao, Lei, Zhao, Li, Sun and Liu.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 01 September 2020
                : 15 February 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 51, Pages: 13, Words: 6838
                Categories
                Cardiovascular Medicine
                Systematic Review

                remote ischemic preconditioning,acute kidney injury,cardiac surgery,off-pump,meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article