Limits...
Impact of cardiovascular risk factors and medication use on the efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning: post hoc subgroup analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

Sloth AD, Schmidt MR, Munk K, Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT, Bøtker HE, CONDI Investigato - BMJ Open (2015)

Bottom Line: The effect of RIC may be modified by cardiovascular risk factors and their medications.We found no significant difference in the efficacy of RIC in subgroups of cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use.However, point estimates indicated a reduced effect of RIC among smokers (median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups: -0.02 (95% CI -0.32 to 0.28) in smokers vs 0.25 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.42) in non-smokers, p value for interaction=0.13) and an increased effect of RIC in statin users (median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups: 0.34 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.65) in statin users vs 0.09 (95% CI -0.11 to 0.29) in non-statin users, p value for interaction=0.19).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Stratum-specific median differences in MSI between RIC and control groups according to cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use. Median difference=calculated median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups using non-parametric quantile regression. CIs and p values for interaction are computed with non-parametric bootstrapping (1000 replications). ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; MSI, myocardial salvage index; pPCI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention; RIC, remote ischaemic conditioning.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4390720&req=5

BMJOPEN2014006923F2: Stratum-specific median differences in MSI between RIC and control groups according to cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use. Median difference=calculated median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups using non-parametric quantile regression. CIs and p values for interaction are computed with non-parametric bootstrapping (1000 replications). ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; MSI, myocardial salvage index; pPCI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention; RIC, remote ischaemic conditioning.

Mentions: When we tested for interaction, there was no significant difference in the efficacy of RIC in subgroups of cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use (figure 2).


Impact of cardiovascular risk factors and medication use on the efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning: post hoc subgroup analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

Sloth AD, Schmidt MR, Munk K, Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT, Bøtker HE, CONDI Investigato - BMJ Open (2015)

Stratum-specific median differences in MSI between RIC and control groups according to cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use. Median difference=calculated median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups using non-parametric quantile regression. CIs and p values for interaction are computed with non-parametric bootstrapping (1000 replications). ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; MSI, myocardial salvage index; pPCI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention; RIC, remote ischaemic conditioning.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4390720&req=5

BMJOPEN2014006923F2: Stratum-specific median differences in MSI between RIC and control groups according to cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use. Median difference=calculated median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups using non-parametric quantile regression. CIs and p values for interaction are computed with non-parametric bootstrapping (1000 replications). ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; MSI, myocardial salvage index; pPCI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention; RIC, remote ischaemic conditioning.
Mentions: When we tested for interaction, there was no significant difference in the efficacy of RIC in subgroups of cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use (figure 2).

Bottom Line: The effect of RIC may be modified by cardiovascular risk factors and their medications.We found no significant difference in the efficacy of RIC in subgroups of cardiovascular risk factors, lipid and glucose levels, and medication use.However, point estimates indicated a reduced effect of RIC among smokers (median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups: -0.02 (95% CI -0.32 to 0.28) in smokers vs 0.25 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.42) in non-smokers, p value for interaction=0.13) and an increased effect of RIC in statin users (median difference in MSI between RIC and control groups: 0.34 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.65) in statin users vs 0.09 (95% CI -0.11 to 0.29) in non-statin users, p value for interaction=0.19).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus