ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2026
Comparison of the effects of direct and remote ischemic post and preconditioning in the kidney of young rats: histological and laboratory evaluation.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effects of direct and remote ischemic preconditioning and postconditioning on kidney ischemia-reperfusion injury in young rats.
methodsThis study was divided into two experimental phases: preconditioning and postconditioning. In each phase, 78 rats were randomly assigned to four groups: control (CG), ischemia-reperfusion (IRG), direct ischemic pre/postconditioning (DIPG), and remote ischemic pre/postconditioning (RIPG). Animals were euthanized at 0- or 24-hours post-procedure, and samples were collected for histological and biochemical analyses.
resultsThe sum of the histological findings revealed no significant differences among the pre/postconditioning groups. However, serum calcium levels were significantly higher in preconditioning, DIPG compared to the control group (p = 0.002), and in postconditioning, DIPG and RIPG compared to the control group (p = 0.028 and p = 0.005, respectively). In postconditioning, the chlorine levels were higher in IRG compared to the DIPG group (p = 0.029).
conclusionIn our findings, ischemic preconditioning and ischemic postconditioning no provided significant protection of renal tissue.
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.