Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29664057›Full record

SynthesisChinese medical journal2018

Remote Ischemic Postconditioning for Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Jing-Jing Zhao, Hui Xiao, Wen-Bo Zhao, Xiao-Pei Zhang, Yu Xiang, Zeng-Jie Ye, Miao-Miao Mo, Xue-Ting Peng, Lin Wei

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Chinese medical journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Remote ischaemic conditioning for preventing and treating ischaemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jing-Jing ZhaoDepartment of Nursing, Chongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Chongqing 401331, China.
Hui XiaoNursing Department, Guangdong Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Wen-Bo ZhaoDepartment of Nephrology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632, China.
Xiao-Pei ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Guangdong Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Yu XiangDepartment of Neurology, Huaihua Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Huaihua, Hunan 418000, China.
Zeng-Jie YeDepartment of Economics and Management, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Miao-Miao MoDepartment of Neurology, Guangdong Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Xue-Ting PengThe Second Clinical Medical College, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Lin WeiDepartment of Neurology, Guangdong Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510120, China.
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNChongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College · CNHuaihua University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemote ischemic postconditioning (RIPostC) appears to protect distant organs from ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI). However, cerebral protection results have remained inconclusive. In the present study, a meta-analysis was performed to compare stroke patients with and without RIPostC.

methodsCNKI, WanFang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to July 2016. Data were analyzed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models by Review Manager. For each outcome, risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

resultsA total of 13 randomized controlled trials that enrolled a total of 794 study participants who suffered from or are at risk for brain IRI were selected. Compared with controls, RIPostC significantly reduced the recurrence of stroke or transient ischemic attacks (RR = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.26-0.55; P < 0.00001). Moreover, it can reduce the levels of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (MD: 1.96; 95% CI: 2.18-1.75; P < 0.00001), modified Rankin Scale score (MD: 0.73; 95% CI: 1.20-0.25; P = 0.00300), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (MD: 4.17; 95% CI: 4.71-3.62; P < 0.00001) between the two groups. There was no side effect of RIPostC using tourniquet cuff around the limb on ischemic stroke treating based on different intervention duration.

conclusionThe present meta-analysis suggests that RIPostC might offer cerebral protection for stroke patients suffering from or are at risk of brain IRI.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaHumansIschemic Attack, TransientIschemic PostconditioningRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStrokeIschemic StrokeMeta-AnalysisRemote Ischemic Postconditioning

Identifiers

PMID29664057
PMCPMC5912063
OpenAlexW2797700895

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.