ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024
Effectiveness of remote ischemic preconditioning in patients undergoing transplant surgery: meta-analysis of randomized control studies.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a phenomenon in which the induction of shortened periods of ischemia prior to surgical procedures within a distant tissue preserves other tissues or organs of concern, such as the liver or kidney in transplant surgery, in the event of prolonged ischemic insults. The authors aim to evaluate the effectiveness of RIPC in patients undergoing transplant surgery, specifically kidney and liver transplants. Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched until 19 December 2023 for trials evaluating RIPC in patients undergoing transplant surgery. A total of 9364 search articles were obtained, which yielded 10 eligible studies. Data analysis was done using RevMan 5.4 software. The risk of bias was done using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results and discussion: For graft rejection, the study observed a relative risk of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.49-1.98,
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.