ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Microsurgical Head and Neck Reconstruction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of In-house Computer-aided Design and Manufacturing for Accelerated Free Fibula Flap Reconstruction of Mandibular Defects in Cancer Patients.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- Human stem cells prevent flap necrosis in preclinical animal models: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2022Review
- Nature's marvels endowed in gaseous molecules I: Carbon monoxide and its physiological and therapeutic roles.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The free flap failure rate is 5% in head and neck microsurgical reconstruction, and ischemia-reperfusion injury is an important mechanism behind this failure rate. Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a recent intervention targeting ischemia-reperfusion injury. The aim of the present study was to investigate if RIPC improved clinical outcomes in microsurgical reconstruction.
methodsHead and neck cancer patients undergoing tumor resection and microsurgical reconstruction were included in a randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized (1:1) to RIPC or sham intervention administered intraoperatively just before transfer of the free flap. RIPC was administered by four 5-minute periods of upper extremity occlusion and reperfusion. Clinical data were prospectively collected in the perioperative period and at follow-up on postoperative days 30 and 90. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed.
resultsSixty patients were randomized to RIPC (n = 30) or sham intervention (n = 30). All patients received allocated intervention. No patients were lost to follow up. At 30-day follow-up, flap failure occurred in 7% of RIPC patients (n = 2) and 3% of sham patients (n = 1) with the relative risk and 95% confidence interval 2.0 [0.2;20.9],
conclusionsRIPC is safe and feasible but does not affect clinical outcomes in head and neck cancer patients undergoing microsurgical reconstruction.
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.