Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39702489›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2024

Remote ischaemic conditioning for neurological disorders-a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Ali Alhashimi, Marharyta Kamarova, Sheharyar S Baig, Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman Nair, Tao Wang, Jessica Redgrave, Arshad Majid, Ali N Ali

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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.

Ali Alhashimi *University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Marharyta Kamarova *Department of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Sheharyar S BaigDepartment of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman NairDepartment of Neurology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Tao WangDepartment of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Jessica RedgraveDepartment of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Arshad MajidDepartment of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Ali N AliDepartment of Neuroscience, Geriatrics and Stroke, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. ali.ali@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6339-4076

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRemote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) refers to the use of controlled transient ischemic and reperfusion cycles, commonly of the upper or lower limb, to mitigate cellular damage from ischaemic injury. Preclinical studies demonstrate that RIC may have a neuroprotective effect and therefore could represent a novel therapeutic option in the management of neurological disorders. The aim of this review is to comprehensively describe the current clinical evidence of RIC in neurological disorders.

methodsA computerised search of EMBASE and OVID MEDLINE was conducted from 2002 to October 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating RIC in neurological diseases.

resultsA total of 46 different RCTs in 12 different neurological disorders (n = 7544) were included in the analysis. Conditions included acute ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial stenosis and vascular cognitive impairment. The most commonly used RIC protocol parameters in the selected studies were as follows: cuff pressure at 200 mmHg (27 trials), 5-min cycle length (42 trials), 5 cycles of ischaemia and reperfusion (24 trials) and the application to the upper limb unilaterally (23 trials).

conclusionsThe comprehensive analysis of the included studies reveals promising results regarding the safety and therapeutic effect of RIC as an option for managing neurological diseases. Particularly, the strongest evidence supports its potential use in chronic stroke patients and vascular cognitive impairment. The neuroprotective effects of RIC, as demonstrated in preclinical studies, suggest that this therapeutic approach could extend its benefits to various other diseases affecting the nervous system. However, to establish the efficacy of RIC across different neurological disorders, further trials with larger sample sizes and more diverse patient populations are warranted. Upcoming trials are expected to provide valuable evidence that will not only confirm the efficacy of RIC in neurological disease management but also help identify the most optimal RIC regimen for specific conditions.

Indexed as

Ischemic PreconditioningNervous System DiseasesHumansIschemic StrokeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicIschemic conditioningNeurodegenerative diseaseRemote ischemic conditioningStrokeSubarachnoid haemorrhageVascular dementia

Identifiers

PMID39702489
PMCPMC11657452

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.