Ischaemic conditioning reduces kidney injury in an experimental large-animal model of warm renal ischaemia

Remote ischemic conditioning may improve graft function following kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has the potential to benefit graft function following kidney transplantation by reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury; however, the current clinical evidence is inconclusive. This meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) aimed to determine whether RIC improves graft function after kidney transplantation.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases until June 20, 2023, to identify all randomized controlled trials that examined the impact of RIC on graft function after kidney transplantation. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) post-kidney transplantation. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of acute rejection, graft loss, 3- and 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR), and the length of hospital stay. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on RIC procedures (preconditioning, perconditioning, or postconditioning), implementation sites (upper or lower extremity), and graft source (living or deceased donor).

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included eight trials involving 1038 patients. Compared with the control, RIC did not significantly reduce the incidence of DGF (8.8% vs. 15.3%; risk ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-1.21, P = 0.25, I2 = 16%), and TSA results showed that the required information size was not reached. However, the RIC group had a significantly increased eGFR at 3 months after transplantation (mean difference = 2.74 ml/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI: 1.44-4.05 ml/min/1.73 m2, P < 0.0001, I2 = 0%), with a sufficient evidence suggested by TSA. The secondary outcomes were comparable between the other secondary outcomes. The treatment effect of RIC did not differ between the subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis, RIC did not lead to a significant reduction in the incidence of DGF after kidney transplantation. Nonetheless, RIC demonstrated a positive correlation with 3-month eGFR. Given the limited number of patients included in this study, well-designed clinical trials with large sample sizes are required to validate the renoprotective benefits of RIC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Number CRD42023464447).

Protective role of remote ischemic conditioning in renal transplantation and partial nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

Studies have shown that remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) can effectively attenuate ischemic-reperfusion injury in the heart and brain, but the effect on ischemic-reperfusion injury in patients with kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy remains controversial. The main objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate whether RIC provides renal protection after renal ischemia-reperfusion injury in patients undergoing kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy.

Methods

A computer-based search was conducted to retrieve relevant publications from the PubMed database, Embase database, Cochrane Library and Web of Science database. We then conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that met our study inclusion criteria.

Results

Eleven eligible studies included a total of 1,145 patients with kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy for systematic review and meta-analysis, among whom 576 patients were randomly assigned to the RIC group and the remaining 569 to the control group. The 3-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was improved in the RIC group, which was statistically significant between the two groups on kidney transplantation [P &lt; 0.001; mean difference (MD) = 2.74, confidence interval (CI): 1.41 to 4.06; I2 = 14%], and the 1- and 2-day postoperative Scr levels in the RIC group decreased, which was statistically significant between the two groups on kidney transplantation (1-day postoperative: P &lt; 0.001; MD = 0.10, CI: 0.05 to 0.15, I2 = 0; 2-day postoperative: P = 0.006; MD = 0.41, CI: 0.12 to 0.70, I2 = 0), but at other times, there was no significant difference between the two groups in Scr levels. The incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) decreased, but there was no significant difference (P = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.26). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of cross-clamp time, cold ischemia time, warm ischemic time, acute rejection (AR), graft loss or length of hospital stay.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis showed that the effect of remote ischemia conditioning on reducing serum creatinine (Scr) and improving estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) seemed to be very weak, and we did not observe a significant protective effect of RIC on renal ischemic-reperfusion. Due to small sample sizes, more studies using stricter inclusion criteria are needed to elucidate the nephroprotective effect of RIC in renal surgery in the future.

Experimental models of acute kidney injury for translational research

Preclinical models of human disease provide powerful tools for therapeutic discovery but have limitations. This problem is especially apparent in the field of acute kidney injury (AKI), in which clinical trial failures have been attributed to inaccurate modelling performed largely in rodents. Multidisciplinary efforts such as the Kidney Precision Medicine Project are now starting to identify molecular subtypes of human AKI. In addition, over the past decade, there have been developments in human pluripotent stem cell-derived kidney organoids as well as zebrafish, rodent and large animal models of AKI. These organoid and AKI models are being deployed at different stages of preclinical therapeutic development. However, the traditionally siloed, preclinical investigator-driven approaches that have been used to evaluate AKI therapeutics to date rarely account for the limitations of the model systems used and have given rise to false expectations of clinical efficacy in patients with different AKI pathophysiologies. To address this problem, there is a need to develop more flexible and integrated approaches, involving teams of investigators with expertise in a range of different model systems, working closely with clinical investigators, to develop robust preclinical evidence to support more focused interventions in patients with AKI.