Remote Ischemic Conditioning With Medical Management or Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Qi Li,Jinxiu Guo,Hui-Sheng Chen,Rolf Ankerlund Blauenfeldt,David C Hess,Fernando Pico,Pooja Khatri,Bruce C V Campbell,Xinggang Feng,Mohamad Abdalkader,Jeffrey L Saver,Raul G Nogueira,Bingwu Jiang,Bing Li,Min Yang,Hongfei Sang,Qingwu Yang,Zhongming Qiu,Yi Dai,Thanh N Nguyen,Hui-sheng Chen,David C. Hess,Bruce C.V. Campbell,Jeffrey L. Saver,Raul G. Nogueira,Thanh N. Nguyen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000207983
IF: 9.9
2024-04-09
Neurology
Abstract:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a low-cost, accessible, and noninvasive neuroprotective treatment strategy, but its efficacy and safety in acute ischemic stroke are controversial. With the publication of several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the recent results of the RESIST trial, it may be possible to identify the patient population that may (or may not) benefit from RIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of RIC in patients with ischemic stroke receiving different treatments by pooling data of all randomized controlled studies to date.METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Elsevier, and Web of Science databases to obtain articles in all languages from inception until May 25, 2023. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at the specified endpoint time in the trial. The secondary outcomes were change in NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and recurrence of stroke events. The safety outcomes were cardiovascular events, cerebral hemorrhage, and mortality. The quality of articles was evaluated through the Cochrane risk assessment tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023430073).RESULTS: There were 7,657 patients from 22 RCTs included. Compared with the control group, patients who received RIC did not have improved mRS functional outcomes, regardless of whether they received medical management, reperfusion therapy with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), or mechanical thrombectomy (MT). In the medical management group, patients who received RIC had decreased incidence of stroke recurrence (risk ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92, <i>p</i> = 0.02) and lower follow-up NIHSS score by 1.72 points compared with the control group (<i>p</i> < 0.00001). There was no increased risk of adverse events including death or cerebral hemorrhage in the IVT or medical management group.DISCUSSION: In patients with ischemic stroke who are not eligible for reperfusion therapy, RIC did not affect mRS functional outcomes but significantly improved the NIHSS score at the follow-up endpoint and reduced stroke recurrence, without increasing the risk of cerebral hemorrhage or death. In patients who received IVT or MT, the benefit of RIC was not observed.
clinical neurology