Trial reportAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2024
Baseline systolic blood pressure, hypertension history, and efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning.
Trial report in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Metabolic Syndrome and Efficacy of Remote Ischemic Postconditioning in Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RICAMIS Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe performed a post hoc exploratory analysis of Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke (RICAMIS) to determine whether hypertension history and baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) affect the efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC).
methodsBased on the full analysis set of RICAMIS, patients were divided into hypertension versus non-hypertension group, or <140 mmHg versus ≥140 mmHg group. Each group was further subdivided into RIC and control subgroups. The primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-1 at 90 days. Efficacy of RIC was compared among patients with hypertension versus nonhypertension history and SBP of <140 mmHg versus ≥140 mmHg. Furthermore, the interaction effect of treatment with hypertension and SBP was assessed.
resultsCompared with control group, RIC produced a significantly higher proportion of patients with excellent functional outcome in the nonhypertension group (RIC vs. control: 65.7% vs. 57.0%, OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.06-1.98; p = 0.02), but no significant difference was observed in the hypertension group (RIC vs. control: 69.1% vs. 65.2%, p = 0.17). Similar results were observed in SBP ≥140 mmHg group (RIC vs. control: 68.0% vs. 61.2%, p = 0.009) and SBP <140 mmHg group (RIC vs. control: 65.6% vs. 64.7%, p = 0.77). No interaction effect of RIC on primary outcome was identified.
interpretationHypertension and baseline SBP did not affect the neuroprotective effect of RIC, but they were associated with higher probability of excellent functional outcome in patients with acute moderate ischemic stroke who received RIC treatment.
Indexed as
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.