Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34282277›Full record

SynthesisPediatric research2022

Remote ischemic postconditioning for neuroprotection after newborn hypoxia-ischemia: systematic review of preclinical studies.

Ted C K Andelius, Tine B Henriksen, Birgitte S Kousholt, Kasper J Kyng

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pediatric research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ted C K AndeliusDepartment of Paediatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Tine B HenriksenDepartment of Paediatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Birgitte S KousholtAarhus University Group for Understanding Systematic Reviews and Metaanalyses in Translational Preclinical Science, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Kasper J KyngDepartment of Paediatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark. kasper.kyng@clin.au.dk.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKAarhus University · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) is a major contributor to death and disability worldwide. Remote ischemic postconditioning (RIPC) may offer neuroprotection but has only been tested in preclinical models. Various preclinical models with different assessments of outcomes complicate interpretation. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the neuroprotective effect of RIPC in animal models of HIE.

methodsThe protocol was preregistered at The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42020205944). Literature was searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (April 2020). A formal meta-analysis was impossible due to heterogeneity and a descriptive synthesis was performed.

resultsThirty-two papers were screened, and five papers were included in the analysis. These included three piglet studies and two rat studies. A broad range of outcome measures was assessed, with inconsistent results. RIPC improved brain lactate/N-acetylaspartate ratios in two piglet studies, suggesting a limited metabolic effect, while most other outcomes assessed were equally likely to improve or not.

conclusionsThere is a lack of evidence to evaluate the neuroprotective effect of RIPC in HIE. Additional studies should aim to standardize methodology and outcome acquisition focusing on clinically relevant outcomes. Future studies should address the optimal timing and duration of RIPC and the combination with therapeutic hypothermia. IMPACT: This systematic review summarizes five preclinical studies that reported inconsistent effects of RIPC as a neuroprotective intervention after hypoxia-ischemia. The heterogeneity of hypoxia-ischemia animal models employed, mode of postconditioning, and diverse outcomes assessed at varying times means the key message is that no clear conclusions on effect can be drawn. This review highlights the need for future studies to be designed with standardized methodology and common clinically relevant outcomes in models with documented translatability to the human condition.

Indexed as

Hypoxia-Ischemia, BrainIschemic PostconditioningNeuroprotective AgentsAnimalsIschemiaNeuroprotectionRatsSwineNeuroprotective Agents

Identifiers

PMID34282277
OpenAlexW3183889501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.