Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23778346›Full record

Trial reportClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2013

Remote ischemic preconditioning in patients with intermittent claudication.

Glauco Fernandes Saes, Antonio Eduardo Zerati, Nelson Wolosker, Luciana Ragazzo, Ruben Miguel Ayzin Rosoky, Raphael Mendes Ritti-Dias, Gabriel Grizzo Cucato, Marcelo Chehuen, Breno Quintella Farah, Pedro Puech-Leão

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. From ischemic conditioning to 'hyperconditioning': clinical phenomenon and basic science opportunity.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society · 2014
    Article
  7. DIFFERENT PROTOCOLS OF POSTCONDITIONING DOES NOT ATTENUATE MESENTERIC ISCHEMIA-REPERFUSION INJURY AFTER SHORT-TERM REPERFUSION.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Glauco Fernandes SaesHospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, Disciplina de Cirurgia Vascular, Ambulatório de Claudicação, São Paulo/SP, Brasil. glauco.saes@terra.com.br
Antonio Eduardo Zerati
Nelson Wolosker
Luciana Ragazzo
Ruben Miguel Ayzin Rosoky
Raphael Mendes Ritti-Dias
Gabriel Grizzo Cucato
Marcelo Chehuen
Breno Quintella Farah
Pedro Puech-Leão
Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRemote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a phenomenon in which a short period of sub-lethal ischemia in one organ protects against subsequent bouts of ischemia in another organ. We hypothesized that RIPC in patients with intermittent claudication would increase muscle tissue resistance to ischemia, thereby resulting in an increased ability to walk.

methodsIn a claudication clinic, 52 ambulatory patients who presented with complaints of intermittent claudication in the lower limbs associated with an absent or reduced arterial pulse in the symptomatic limb and/or an ankle-brachial index <0.90 were recruited for this study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups (A, B and C). All of the patients underwent two tests on a treadmill according to the Gardener protocol. Group A was tested first without RIPC. Group A was subjected to RIPC prior to the second treadmill test. Group B was subjected to RIPC prior to the first treadmill test and then was subjected to a treadmill test without RIPC. In Group C (control group), both treadmill tests were performed without RIPC. The first and second tests were conducted seven days apart. Brazilian Clinical Trials: RBR-7TF6TM.

resultsGroup A showed a significant increase in the initial claudication distance in the second test compared to the first test.

conclusionRIPC increased the initial claudication distance in patients with intermittent claudication; however, RIPC did not affect the total walking distance of the patients.

Indexed as

AgedExercise TestFemaleHumansIntermittent ClaudicationIschemic PreconditioningMaleMiddle AgedTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeWalking

Identifiers

PMID23778346
PMCPMC3634960
OpenAlexW2042486607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.