Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28356068›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2017

A randomized trial of remote ischemic preconditioning and control treatment for cardioprotection in sevoflurane-anesthetized CABG patients.

Rianne Nederlof, Nina C Weber, Nicole P Juffermans, Bas A M J de Mol, Markus W Hollmann, Benedikt Preckel, Coert J Zuurbier

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Mitochondrial Kinase Signaling for Cardioprotection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rianne NederlofLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nina C WeberLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicole P JuffermansLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bas A M J de MolDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Markus W HollmannLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Benedikt PreckelLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Coert J ZuurbierLaboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.), Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. c.j.zuurbier@amc.uva.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-8361-2448
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) efficacy is debated. Possibly, because propofol, which has a RIPC-inhibiting action, is used in most RIPC trials. It has been suggested that clinical efficacy is, however, present with volatile anesthesia in the absence of propofol, although this is based on one phase 1 trial only. Therefore, in the present study we further explore the relation between RIPC and cardioprotection with perioperative anesthesia restricted to sevoflurane and fentanyl, in CABG patients without concomitant procedures.

methodsIn a single-center study, we aimed to randomize 46 patients to either RIPC (3x5 min inflation of a blood pressure cuff around the arm) or control treatment (deflated cuff around the arm). Blood samples were obtained before and after RIPC to evaluate potential RIPC-induced mediators (Interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, Tumor Necrosis Factor-α, Macrophage Inhibitory Factor). An atrial tissue sample was obtained at cannulation of the appendix of the right atrium for determination of mitochondrial bound hexokinase II (mtHKII) and other survival proteins (Akt and AMP-activated protein kinase α). In blood samples taken before and 6, 12 and 24 h after surgery cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were determined. Surgery was strictly performed under sevoflurane anesthesia (no propofol).

resultsWe actually randomized 16 patients to control treatment and 13 patients to RIPC. The mean 24 h area under the curve (AUC) cTnT was 11.44 (standard deviation 4.66) in the control group and 10.90 (standard deviation 4.73) in the RIPC group (mean difference 0.54, 95% CI -3.06 to 4.13; p = 0.76). The mean 24 h AUC CRP was 1319 (standard deviation 92) in the control group and 1273 (standard deviation 141) in the RIPC group (mean difference 46.2, 95% CI -288 to 380; p = 0.78). RIPC was without effect on survival proteins in atrial tissue samples obtained before surgery (mitochondrial hexokinase, Akt and AMPK) and inflammatory mediators obtained before and immediately after RIPC (IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, macrophage migration inhibitory factor).

conclusionMany factors can interfere with the outcome of RIPC. Trying to correct for this led to strict inclusion criteria, which, in combination with a decreased institutional frequency of CABG without concomitant procedures and a change in institutional anesthetic regimen away from volatile anesthetics towards total intravenous anesthesia, caused slow inclusion and halting of this trial after 3 years, before target inclusion could be reached. Therefore this study is underpowered to prove its primary goal that RIPC reduced AUC cTnT by < 25%. Nevertheless, we have shown that the effect of RIPC on 24 h AUC cTnT, in cardiac surgery with anesthesia during surgery restricted to sevoflurane/fentanyl (no propofol), was between a decrease of 27% and an increase of 36%. These findings are not in line with previous studies in this field.

trial registrationThe Netherlands Trial Register: NTR2915 ; Registered 25 Mei 2011.

Indexed as

AgedAMP-Activated Protein KinasesAnesthetics, InhalationCardiotonic AgentsCoronary Artery BypassC-Reactive ProteinHeart AtriaHexokinaseHumansInterleukin-10Interleukin-6Intramolecular OxidoreductasesIschemic PreconditioningMacrophage Migration-Inhibitory FactorsMaleMethyl EthersAMP-Activated Protein KinasesAnesthetics, InhalationCardiotonic AgentsC-Reactive ProteinHexokinaseIL10 protein, humanIL6 protein, humanInterleukin-10Interleukin-6Intramolecular OxidoreductasesMacrophage Migration-Inhibitory FactorsMethyl EthersMIF protein, humanOncogene Protein v-aktSevofluraneTroponin TTumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID28356068
PMCPMC5372281
OpenAlexW2600685989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.