Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41146928›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning on blood pressure in essential hypertension in China (RICBP-EH): a randomised, controlled, parallel-group trial.

Wen-Jing Yin, Si-Ji Wang, Yang Qu, Jia-Xin Ren, Peng Zhang, Reziya Abuduxukuer, Yi Yang, Zhen-Ni Guo

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05910242 (Efficacy and Safety of Remote Ischemic Conditioning in the Treatment of Essential Hypertension), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05910242 nacompletednot on this map

Efficacy and Safety of Remote Ischemic Conditioning in the Treatment of Essential Hypertension

TypeinterventionalSponsorYi YangRan2023 to 2024Enrolled102ConditionsEssential HypertensionArmsRemote ischemic conditioning, Sham remote ischemic conditioning
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Wen-Jing YinStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Si-Ji WangStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Yang QuStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Jia-Xin RenStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Peng ZhangStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Reziya AbuduxukuerStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Yi YangStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.
Zhen-Ni GuoStroke Center, Department of Neurology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Inadequately controlled hypertension is a major global public health challenge. This study aimed to explore whether remote ischemic conditioning (RIC), a type of heart- and brain-protection treatment, could be used as an adjunctive therapy for people with poor blood pressure (BP) control. Methods: This was a randomised, single-blinded, parallel-controlled trial conducted at a single centre in Changchun, China. Patients with clinically diagnosed essential hypertension and systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140 mm Hg, including those with SBP ≥140 mm Hg even after treatment or those who do not receive any treatment, were enrolled. Enrolled participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to either RIC or sham RIC for 7 days. Sitting BP was measured twice daily (morning: between 6:00 and 9:00; evening: between 18:00 and 21:00) from the day before treatment to the last day (8 days, 16 measurements). Blood pressure variability (BPV) was also calculated. The primary endpoint was the difference in average SBP during treatment (7 days, 14 measurements). Adverse events were recorded during the study period. The intention-to-treat analysis included all participants who were randomly assigned to a study group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05910242. Findings: Between June 20, 2023, and March 6, 2024, 102 patients completed the study (n = 51 per group). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the average SBP during treatment was lower in the RIC group than the sham RIC group (143·3 ± 10·0 vs. 147·6 ± 6·3 mm Hg; baseline adjusted between-group difference: -4·8 mm Hg [95% CI, -6·9, -2·7 mm Hg]; Interpretation: Our findings suggest that RIC treatment can safely and effectively reduce BP in patients with essential hypertension who have SBP ≥140 mm Hg, regardless of whether antihypertensive drugs are applied or not. This finding provides a safe and effective antihypertensive strategy for treating essential hypertension in patients with poor BP control. However, further research is warranted to explore the mechanisms underlying the BP-lowering effects of RIC deeply. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Science and Technology Department of Jilin Province, Jilin Provincial Key Laboratory, the Norman Bethune Health Science Center of Jilin University, the Talent Reserve Program of the First Hospital of Jilin University, and the Science and Technology Research Program of the Education Department of Jilin Province.

Indexed as

Blood pressureBlood pressure variabilityEssential hypertensionRemote ischemic conditioning

Identifiers

PMID41146928
PMCPMC12554178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.