ReviewNeuroSci2026
Biomarkers of Remote Ischaemic Conditioning in Stroke and Cerebral Small Vessel Disease: A Narrative Review.
Review in NeuroSci, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRemote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) is a promising treatment for neurological disorders. It involves cycles of temporary ischaemic stimulus, usually applied to a limb, and has shown significant improvement in neurological function in many trials. This review focuses on identifying and summarising the biomarkers of RIC that can enhance clinical practice and understanding of its mechanisms.
methodsA search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE up to August 2025 using terms related to ischaemic conditioning. Studies were included if they were RCTs involving cerebrovascular disease, used RIC as treatment, and measured mechanistic biomarkers. We extracted and summarised data on study design, participant characteristics, RIC intervention protocols (including timing, frequency, duration, and pressure), biomarker types and measurement methods, timing of biomarker assessment, and main findings relating biomarker changes to clinical outcomes.
resultsThe review identified twenty-one RCTs examining biomarkers, including serum biomarkers, imaging markers, and other physiological indicators. Key biomarkers identified include systemic inflammatory cytokines and various imaging markers such as cerebral blood flow (CBF), white matter hyperintensities (WMH), and brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (BA-FMD).
conclusionsThe evidence suggests that RIC modulates various biomarkers linked to neuroprotection and recovery. Reliable biomarkers of RIC would enhance the understanding of its mechanisms and improve targeted therapies. The clinical utility of these biomarkers requires further validation through large-scale trials. Standardised protocols and longitudinal studies are essential for optimising RIC therapy and improving patient outcomes in stroke and cerebral small vessel disease. Future research should focus on expanding our understanding of these biomarkers and their interactions with RIC, leading to more personalised and effective treatments.
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.