Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials on Remote Ischemic Conditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Ayman Elbadawi, Le Dung Ha, Ahmed S. Abuzaid, Gabriele Crimi, Muhammad S. Azzouz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Ischemia/reperfusion injury adversely affects the final infarct size (IS) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Few studies have evaluated the role of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in reducing ischemia/reperfusion injury. However, the results of these studies were not consistent, and an overview of overall effectiveness of this technique in patients with STEMI is lacking. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence in literature regarding the application of RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI. The authors included randomized trials that studied RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI versus no conditioning (standard of care). Final analysis included 8 trials with a total of 1,083 patients. Compared with standard of care alone, RIC was associated with reduced IS assessed by biomarker release (standardized mean difference = −0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.37 to −0.09; p = 0.001), better rates of ST-segment resolution (54% vs 30%; relative risk [RR] 1.78; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.34; p <0.001), reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (11% vs 20%; RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; p = 0.003), and nonsignificant reduction in IS assessed by cardiac imaging (standardized mean difference = −0.15; 95% CI −1.03 to −0.14; p = 0.36). There was no difference in postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-III flow between RIC and standard of care groups (86% vs 87%; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05; p = 0.81). In conclusion, remote ischemic conditioning may improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI evidenced by reduced biomarkers release, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and better ST-segment resolution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)832-838
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume119
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 15 2017

Fingerprint

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Meta-Analysis
Standard of Care
Confidence Intervals
Reperfusion Injury
Biomarkers
ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Myocardial Infarction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials on Remote Ischemic Conditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction. / Elbadawi, Ayman; Ha, Le Dung; Abuzaid, Ahmed S.; Crimi, Gabriele; Azzouz, Muhammad S.

In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 119, No. 6, 15.03.2017, p. 832-838.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8eaadc86c2ec4ccbae2575417b4cad7a,
title = "Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials on Remote Ischemic Conditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction",
abstract = "Ischemia/reperfusion injury adversely affects the final infarct size (IS) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Few studies have evaluated the role of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in reducing ischemia/reperfusion injury. However, the results of these studies were not consistent, and an overview of overall effectiveness of this technique in patients with STEMI is lacking. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence in literature regarding the application of RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI. The authors included randomized trials that studied RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI versus no conditioning (standard of care). Final analysis included 8 trials with a total of 1,083 patients. Compared with standard of care alone, RIC was associated with reduced IS assessed by biomarker release (standardized mean difference = −0.23, 95{\%} confidence interval [CI] −0.37 to −0.09; p = 0.001), better rates of ST-segment resolution (54{\%} vs 30{\%}; relative risk [RR] 1.78; 95{\%} CI 1.35 to 2.34; p <0.001), reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (11{\%} vs 20{\%}; RR 0.57; 95{\%} CI 0.39 to 0.83; p = 0.003), and nonsignificant reduction in IS assessed by cardiac imaging (standardized mean difference = −0.15; 95{\%} CI −1.03 to −0.14; p = 0.36). There was no difference in postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-III flow between RIC and standard of care groups (86{\%} vs 87{\%}; RR 0.99; 95{\%} CI 0.94 to 1.05; p = 0.81). In conclusion, remote ischemic conditioning may improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI evidenced by reduced biomarkers release, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and better ST-segment resolution.",
author = "Ayman Elbadawi and Ha, {Le Dung} and Abuzaid, {Ahmed S.} and Gabriele Crimi and Azzouz, {Muhammad S.}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.11.036",
language = "English",
volume = "119",
pages = "832--838",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials on Remote Ischemic Conditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

AU - Elbadawi, Ayman

AU - Ha, Le Dung

AU - Abuzaid, Ahmed S.

AU - Crimi, Gabriele

AU - Azzouz, Muhammad S.

PY - 2017/3/15

Y1 - 2017/3/15

N2 - Ischemia/reperfusion injury adversely affects the final infarct size (IS) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Few studies have evaluated the role of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in reducing ischemia/reperfusion injury. However, the results of these studies were not consistent, and an overview of overall effectiveness of this technique in patients with STEMI is lacking. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence in literature regarding the application of RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI. The authors included randomized trials that studied RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI versus no conditioning (standard of care). Final analysis included 8 trials with a total of 1,083 patients. Compared with standard of care alone, RIC was associated with reduced IS assessed by biomarker release (standardized mean difference = −0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.37 to −0.09; p = 0.001), better rates of ST-segment resolution (54% vs 30%; relative risk [RR] 1.78; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.34; p <0.001), reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (11% vs 20%; RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; p = 0.003), and nonsignificant reduction in IS assessed by cardiac imaging (standardized mean difference = −0.15; 95% CI −1.03 to −0.14; p = 0.36). There was no difference in postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-III flow between RIC and standard of care groups (86% vs 87%; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05; p = 0.81). In conclusion, remote ischemic conditioning may improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI evidenced by reduced biomarkers release, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and better ST-segment resolution.

AB - Ischemia/reperfusion injury adversely affects the final infarct size (IS) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Few studies have evaluated the role of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in reducing ischemia/reperfusion injury. However, the results of these studies were not consistent, and an overview of overall effectiveness of this technique in patients with STEMI is lacking. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the available evidence in literature regarding the application of RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI. The authors included randomized trials that studied RIC in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI versus no conditioning (standard of care). Final analysis included 8 trials with a total of 1,083 patients. Compared with standard of care alone, RIC was associated with reduced IS assessed by biomarker release (standardized mean difference = −0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.37 to −0.09; p = 0.001), better rates of ST-segment resolution (54% vs 30%; relative risk [RR] 1.78; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.34; p <0.001), reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (11% vs 20%; RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; p = 0.003), and nonsignificant reduction in IS assessed by cardiac imaging (standardized mean difference = −0.15; 95% CI −1.03 to −0.14; p = 0.36). There was no difference in postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-III flow between RIC and standard of care groups (86% vs 87%; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05; p = 0.81). In conclusion, remote ischemic conditioning may improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI evidenced by reduced biomarkers release, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and better ST-segment resolution.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85008462689&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85008462689&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.11.036

DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.11.036

M3 - Article

VL - 119

SP - 832

EP - 838

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 6

ER -