ArticleBJS open2018
Randomized clinical trial of remote ischaemic preconditioning versus no preconditioning in the prevention of perioperative myocardial infarction during open surgery for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.
Article in BJS open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00883363 (Reduction of Myocardial Infarction by Preconditioning in Patients With Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Reduction of Myocardial Infarction by Preconditioning in Patients With Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus no remote ischaemic preconditioning for vascular and endovascular surgical procedures.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of remote ischaemic preconditioning on mortality and morbidity after non-cardiac surgery: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Sex and Response to Cardioprotective Conditioning Maneuvers.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) has been suggested as a means of protecting vital organs from reperfusion injury during major vascular surgery. This study was designed to determine whether RIPC could reduce the incidence of perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) during open surgery for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Secondary aims were to see if RIPC could reduce 30-day mortality, multiple organ failure, acute intestinal ischaemia, acute kidney injury and ischaemic stroke.
methodsThis randomized, non-blinded clinical trial was undertaken at three vascular surgery centres in Denmark. Patients who had open surgery for ruptured AAA were randomized to intervention with RIPC or control in a 1 : 1 ratio. Postoperative complications and deaths were registered, and ECG and blood samples were obtained daily during the hospital stay.
resultsOf 200 patients randomized, 142 (72 RIPC, 70 controls) were included. There was no difference in rates of perioperative MI between the RIPC and control groups (36 versus 43 per cent respectively), or in rates of organ failure. However, in the per-protocol analysis 30-day mortality was significantly reduced in the RIPC group (odds ratio 0·46, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·99; P = 0·048).
conclusionRIPC did not reduce the incidence of perioperative MI in patients undergoing open surgery for ruptured AAA. Registration number: NCT00883363 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.