Carrasco-Chinchilla F, Muñoz-García AJ, Domínguez-Franco A, Millán-Vázquez G, Guerrero-Molina A, Ortiz-García C, Enguix-Armada A, Alonso-Briales JH, Hernández-García JM, de Teresa-Galván E, Jiménez-Navarro MF. Remote ischaemic postconditioning: does it protect against ischaemic damage in percutaneous coronary revascularisation? Randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial.
Heart 2013;
99:1431-7. [PMID:
23850844 DOI:
10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304172]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Determine whether remote ischaemic postconditioning (RIP) protects against percutaneous coronary intervention-related myocardial infarction (PCI-MI).
DESIGN
Single-centre, randomised, blinded to the researchers, clinical trial. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 01113008).
SETTING
Tertiary hospital centre.
PATIENTS
232 patients underwent elective PCI for stable or unstable angina.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomised to RIP (induction of three 5-min cycles of ischaemia in the arm after the PCI) versus placebo.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome measure was the peak 24-h troponin I level. PCI-MI was defined by an elevation of troponin values >3 or >5 of the 99th percentile according to the classical or the new definition. The secondary outcome measure was hospital admission, PCI for stable angina or acute coronary syndrome and mortality after 1 year of follow-up. The use of RIP in diabetic patients was specifically studied.
RESULTS
The mean age was 64.6 years, and 42% were diabetic. The peak troponin in the RIP patients was 0.476 vs 0.478 ng/mL (p=0.99). PCI-MI occurred in 36% of the RIP patients versus 30.8% in the placebo group (p=0.378). Diabetic RIP patients had more PCI-MI (new definition): OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.10 to 6.92; p=0.027. The secondary outcome measure was seen in 11.7% of the RIP patients versus 10.8% in the placebo group (p=0.907).
CONCLUSIONS
RIP did not reduce the damage associated with elective PCI or cardiovascular events during the follow-up. The diabetic population who underwent RIP had more PCI-MI.
Collapse