Limits...
Protection of remote ischemic preconditioning against acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hu J, Liu S, Jia P, Xu X, Song N, Zhang T, Chen R, Ding X - Crit Care (2016)

Bottom Line: Subgroup analyses indicated that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI in the contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI) subgroup from 13.5 % to 6.5 % (P = 0.000), but not in the ischemia/reperfusion-induced AKI (IR-AKI) subgroup (from 29.5 % to 24.7 %, P = 0.173).In addition, the length of ICU stay in the RIPC group was significantly shorter than in the control group (2.6 vs 2.0 days, P = 0.003).We found strong evidence to support the application of RIPC to prevent CI-AKI, but not IR-AKI.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Nephrology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180, Fenglin Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200032, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a promising approach to preventing acute kidney injury (AKI), but its efficacy is controversial.

Methods: A systematic review of 30 randomized controlled trials was conducted to investigate the effects of RIPC on the incidence and outcomes of AKI. Random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions were used to generate summary estimates and explore sources of heterogeneity. The primary outcome was incidence of AKI and hospital mortality.

Results: The total pooled incidence of AKI in the RIPC group was 11.5 %, significantly less than the 23.3 % incidence in the control group (P = 0.009). Subgroup analyses indicated that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI in the contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI) subgroup from 13.5 % to 6.5 % (P = 0.000), but not in the ischemia/reperfusion-induced AKI (IR-AKI) subgroup (from 29.5 % to 24.7 %, P = 0.173). Random effects meta-regression indicated that RIPC tended to strengthen its renoprotective effect (q = 3.95, df = 1, P = 0.047) in these trials with a higher percentage of diabetes mellitus. RIPC had no significant effect on the incidence of stages 1-3 AKI or renal replacement therapy, change in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hospital or 30-day mortality, or length of hospital stay. But RIPC significantly increased the minimum eGFR in the IR-AKI subgroup (P = 0.006) compared with the control group. In addition, the length of ICU stay in the RIPC group was significantly shorter than in the control group (2.6 vs 2.0 days, P = 0.003).

Conclusions: We found strong evidence to support the application of RIPC to prevent CI-AKI, but not IR-AKI.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Funnel plot to evaluate for publication bias for effects of remote ischemic preconditioning on incidence of acute kidney injury
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837562&req=5

Fig10: Funnel plot to evaluate for publication bias for effects of remote ischemic preconditioning on incidence of acute kidney injury

Mentions: The funnel plots showed no evidence of publication bias. Egger’s test for a regression intercept gave P values of 0.177 for effects of RIPC on incidence of IR-AKI (Fig. 10a) and 0.178 for effects of RIPC on incidence of CI-AKI (Fig. 10b).Fig. 10


Protection of remote ischemic preconditioning against acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hu J, Liu S, Jia P, Xu X, Song N, Zhang T, Chen R, Ding X - Crit Care (2016)

Funnel plot to evaluate for publication bias for effects of remote ischemic preconditioning on incidence of acute kidney injury
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837562&req=5

Fig10: Funnel plot to evaluate for publication bias for effects of remote ischemic preconditioning on incidence of acute kidney injury
Mentions: The funnel plots showed no evidence of publication bias. Egger’s test for a regression intercept gave P values of 0.177 for effects of RIPC on incidence of IR-AKI (Fig. 10a) and 0.178 for effects of RIPC on incidence of CI-AKI (Fig. 10b).Fig. 10

Bottom Line: Subgroup analyses indicated that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI in the contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI) subgroup from 13.5 % to 6.5 % (P = 0.000), but not in the ischemia/reperfusion-induced AKI (IR-AKI) subgroup (from 29.5 % to 24.7 %, P = 0.173).In addition, the length of ICU stay in the RIPC group was significantly shorter than in the control group (2.6 vs 2.0 days, P = 0.003).We found strong evidence to support the application of RIPC to prevent CI-AKI, but not IR-AKI.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Nephrology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180, Fenglin Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200032, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a promising approach to preventing acute kidney injury (AKI), but its efficacy is controversial.

Methods: A systematic review of 30 randomized controlled trials was conducted to investigate the effects of RIPC on the incidence and outcomes of AKI. Random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions were used to generate summary estimates and explore sources of heterogeneity. The primary outcome was incidence of AKI and hospital mortality.

Results: The total pooled incidence of AKI in the RIPC group was 11.5 %, significantly less than the 23.3 % incidence in the control group (P = 0.009). Subgroup analyses indicated that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI in the contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI) subgroup from 13.5 % to 6.5 % (P = 0.000), but not in the ischemia/reperfusion-induced AKI (IR-AKI) subgroup (from 29.5 % to 24.7 %, P = 0.173). Random effects meta-regression indicated that RIPC tended to strengthen its renoprotective effect (q = 3.95, df = 1, P = 0.047) in these trials with a higher percentage of diabetes mellitus. RIPC had no significant effect on the incidence of stages 1-3 AKI or renal replacement therapy, change in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hospital or 30-day mortality, or length of hospital stay. But RIPC significantly increased the minimum eGFR in the IR-AKI subgroup (P = 0.006) compared with the control group. In addition, the length of ICU stay in the RIPC group was significantly shorter than in the control group (2.6 vs 2.0 days, P = 0.003).

Conclusions: We found strong evidence to support the application of RIPC to prevent CI-AKI, but not IR-AKI.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus