Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33903181›Full record

ReviewStroke and vascular neurology2021

Remote ischaemic conditioning for stroke: unanswered questions and future directions.

Sheharyar Baig, Bethany Moyle, Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman Nair, Jessica Redgrave, Arshad Majid, Ali Ali

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stroke and vascular neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sheharyar BaigCerebrovascular Medicine, The University of Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience, Sheffield, UK.
Bethany MoyleCerebrovascular Medicine, The University of Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience, Sheffield, UK.
Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman NairNeurosciences, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Jessica RedgraveCerebrovascular Medicine, The University of Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience, Sheffield, UK.
Arshad MajidFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Ali AliGeriatrics and Stroke Medicine, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK ali.ali@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6339-4076
University of Sheffield · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/R005923/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) refers to a process whereby periods of intermittent ischaemia, typically via the cyclical application of a blood pressure cuff to a limb at above systolic pressure, confers systemic protection against ischaemia in spatially distinct vascular territories. The mechanisms underlying this have not been characterised fully but have been shown to involve neural, hormonal and systemic inflammatory signalling cascades. Preclinical and early clinical studies have been promising and suggest beneficial effects of RIC in acute ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial stenosis and vascular cognitive impairment. Through systematic searches of several clinical trials databases we identified 48 active clinical trials of RIC in ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage and subarachnoid haemorrhage. We summarise the different RIC protocols and outcome measures studied in ongoing clinical trials and highlight which studies are most likely to elucidate the underlying biological mechanisms of RIC and characterise its efficacy in the near future. We discuss the uncertainties of RIC including the optimal frequency and duration of therapy, target patient groups, cost-effectiveness, the confounding impact of medications and the absence of a clinically meaningful biomarker of the conditioning response. With several large clinical trials of RIC expected to report their outcomes within the next 2 years, this review aims to highlight the most important studies and unanswered questions that will need to be addressed before this potentially widely accessible and low-cost intervention can be used in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaIschemic StrokeStrokeSubarachnoid HemorrhageHumansIschemiastrokesubarachnoidthrombolysis

Identifiers

PMID33903181
PMCPMC8258051
OpenAlexW3159439443

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.