ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Non-invasive remote ischemic preconditioning for patients with heart failure undergoing cardiac catheterization: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of six non-invasive remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) interventions during the nursing care of patients with heart failure (HF) prior to cardiac catheterization.
methodsA comprehensive search of nine Chinese and English online databases was conducted from the date of their inception to June 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating RIPC in patients with HF prior to cardiac catheterization. Two independent investigators screened the articles, extracted data, and assessed their quality. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and a network meta-analysis was conducted using R software.
resultsFour trials involving 511 patients with a low risk of bias were included in the analysis. Six non-invasive RIPC interventions were identified, all demonstrating effectiveness in reducing the incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI). Among these, Intervention F (applying up to 50 mmHg above the resting systolic pressure for 5 min to the dominant leg or upper limb, repeated three times with an 18-minute interval) was deemed optimal, although the timing of the procedure was not specified. Intervention D (applying up to 200 mmHg pressure to the upper limb for 5 min, repeated four times with 5-minute intervals, within 45 min prior to cardiac catheterization, ) was considered suboptimal.
conclusionAlthough Intervention D was recommended as the preferred option, none of the four trials examined its impact on the cardiac function of patients with HF. Large-scale, multi-center RCTs are required, with outcome indicators including cardiac function and the occurrence of CI-AKI, to better understand the therapeutic effects of RIPC on HF and reduce the incidence of CI-AKI. This will provide a more robust foundation for clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.