Trial reportEuropean stroke journal2026
Pre-hospital treatment duration and efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning in the RESIST randomised-controlled trial.
Trial report in European stroke journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03481777 (Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients With Acute Stroke), which is not on this 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.
Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients With Acute Stroke: a Multicenter Randomized, Patient-assessor Blinded, Sham-controlled Study
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
Abstract
introductionRemote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) initiated pre-hospital did not improve 90-day functional outcomes after acute stroke in the RESIST trial. The duration of treatment pre-reperfusion modifies treatment effect for other neuroprotective therapies. We examined whether the effects of RIC might be modified by the duration of pre-hospital treatment. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis post-hoc analysis of the RESIST randomised-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03481777) included patients who presented with pre-hospital stroke symptoms < 4 hours, randomised to RIC or sham, diagnosed with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) or ICH (modified intention-to-treat [mITT] cohort). Patients were stratified by time from randomisation to hospital admission (ie, pre-hospital treatment duration). The primary outcome was shift in 90-day mRS; secondary outcomes were 90-day mRS 0-2 and 24-hour neurological improvement (NIHSS).
resultsAmong 902 mITT patients (AIS, n = 737; ICH, n = 165), median randomisation-to-admission time was 29.4 minutes (IQR: 19.6-39.4) and median onset-to-admission time was 88 minutes (IQR: 62.4-131.3). Across pre-hospital treatment duration strata, RIC conferred no significant benefit on 90-day mRS, mRS 0-2 or early NIHSS improvement in the combined, AIS or ICH populations. In patients with AIS receiving reperfusion therapy, stratification by transport time likewise revealed no efficacy differences. No significant interaction was observed between RIC and pre-hospital treatment duration for any outcome.
conclusionLonger pre-hospital treatment duration was not associated with efficacy of RIC in the RESIST trial including in patients with AIS who received reperfusion therapies. Findings may not apply to settings where RIC could be routinely administered for longer periods. We found no treatment duration-dependent benefit of pre-hospital RIC, at least when durations are under an hour.
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.