Remote ischemic conditioning for acute moderate ischemic stroke (RICAMIS): Rationale and design

The potential mechanism and clinical application value of remote ischemic conditioning in stroke

Some studies have confirmed the neuroprotective effect of remote ischemic conditioning against stroke. Although numerous animal researches have shown that the neuroprotective effect of remote ischemic conditioning may be related to neuroinflammation, cellular immunity, apoptosis, and autophagy, the exact underlying molecular mechanisms are unclear. This review summarizes the current status of different types of remote ischemic conditioning methods in animal and clinical studies and analyzes their commonalities and differences in neuroprotective mechanisms and signaling pathways. Remote ischemic conditioning has emerged as a potential therapeutic approach for improving stroke-induced brain injury owing to its simplicity, non-invasiveness, safety, and patient tolerability. Different forms of remote ischemic conditioning exhibit distinct intervention patterns, timing, and application range. Mechanistically, remote ischemic conditioning can exert neuroprotective effects by activating the Notch1/phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt signaling pathway, improving cerebral perfusion, suppressing neuroinflammation, inhibiting cell apoptosis, activating autophagy, and promoting neural regeneration. While remote ischemic conditioning has shown potential in improving stroke outcomes, its full clinical translation has not yet been achieved.

Differential efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning in anterior versus posterior circulation stroke: A prespecified secondary analysis of the RICAMIS trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The benefit of remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) in acute moderate ischaemic stroke has been demonstrated by the Remote Ischaemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischaemic Stroke (RICAMIS) study. This prespecified exploratory analysis aimed to determine whether there was a difference of RIC efficacy in anterior versus posterior circulation stroke based on RICAMIS data.

METHODS

In this analysis, eligible patients presenting within 48 h of stroke onset were divided into two groups: anterior circulation stroke (ACS) and posterior circulation stroke (PCS) groups. The primary endpoint was an excellent functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-1 at 90 days.

RESULTS

In all, 1013 patients were included in the final analysis, including 642 with ACS and 371 with PCS. Compared with the control group, RIC was significantly associated with an increased proportion of mRS scores 0-1 within 90 days in the PCS group (unadjusted odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.0-2.4, p = 0.04; adjusted odds ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.2-3.3, p = 0.005), but not in the ACS group (p = 0.29). Similar results were found regarding secondary outcomes including mRS score 0-2 at 90 days, mRS distribution at 90 days and change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at day 12 from baseline. However, there was no significant interaction effect between stroke location and intervention on the primary outcome (pinteraction = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

Amongst patients with acute PCS who are not candidates for reperfusion treatment, RIC may be associated with a higher probability of improved functional outcomes. These findings need to be validated in prospective trials.

Association of systolic blood pressure variability with remote ischemic conditioning in acute ischemic stroke

Systolic blood pressure variability (SBPV) is associated with outcome in acute ischemic stroke. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has been demonstrated to be effective in stroke and may affect blood pressure. Relationship between SBPV and RIC treatment after stroke warrants investigation. A total of 1707 patients from per-protocol analysis set of RICAMIS study were included. The SBPV was calculated based on blood pressure measured at admission, Day 7, and Day 12. (I) To investigate the effect of SBPV on efficacy of RIC in stroke, patients were divided into High and Low categories in each SBPV parameter. Primary outcome was excellent functional outcome at 90 days. Compared with Control, efficacy of RIC in each category and interaction between categories were investigated. (II) To investigate the effect of RIC treatment on SBPV, SBPV parameters were compared between RIC and Control groups. Compared with Control, a higher likelihood of primary outcome in RIC was found in high category (max-min: adjusted risk difference [RD] = 7.2, 95% CI 1.2-13.1, P = 0.02; standard deviation: adjusted RD = 11.5, 95% CI 1.6-21.4, P = 0.02; coefficient of variation: adjusted RD = 11.2, 95% CI 1.4-21.0, P = 0.03). Significant interaction of RIC on outcomes were found between High and Low standard deviations (adjusted P < 0.05). No significant difference in SBPV parameters were found between treatment groups. This is the first report that Chinese patients with acute moderate ischemic stroke and presenting with higher SBPV, who were non-cardioemoblic stroke and not candidates for intravenous thrombolysis or endovascular therapy, would benefit more from RIC with respect to functional outcomes at 90 days, but 2-week RIC treatment has no effect on SBPV during hospital.

Age and efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning in acute ischemic stroke

AIMS

A post hoc analysis of RICAMIS trial to evaluate functional outcomes in relation to patient age.

METHODS

Patients in RICAMIS were divided into six age groups. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome at 90 days, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-1. Compared with patients receiving usual care alone, we investigated the association of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) effect with functional outcomes in each group and the interaction between RIC effect and age.

RESULTS

Of 1776 patients, 498 were assigned to <60 years, 326 to 60 to <65 years, 325 to 65 to <70 years, 278 to 70 to <75 years, 206 to 75 to <80 years, and 143 to ≥80 years. Higher proportions of primary outcome were found associated with RIC in <60 years group (72.6% vs. 64.8%; adjusted risk difference [RD], 6.8%; 95% CI, -1.6% to 15.1%; p = 0.11), 60 to <65 years group (70.7% vs. 67.1%; adjusted RD, 3.1%; 95% CI, -7.2% to 13.3%; p = 0.56), 65 to <70 years group (70.5% vs. 63.6%; adjusted RD, 3.5%; 95% CI, -6.8% to 13.8%; p = 0.51), 70 to <75 years group (59.7% vs. 54.9%; adjusted RD, 4.7%; 95% CI, -7.1% to 16.4%; p = 0.61), 75 to <80 years group (61.5% vs. 55.9%; adjusted RD, 5.7%; 95% CI, -7.8% to 19.1%; p = 0.41), and ≥ 80 years group (59.2% vs. 59.7%; adjusted RD, -2.6%; 95% CI, -18.8% to 13.5%; p = 0.75). No significant interaction between RIC effect and age was found among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report that RIC effect may be attenuated with increasing age in patients with acute moderate ischemic stroke with respect to functional outcome.

Remote ischemic conditioning for stroke: A critical systematic review

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is the application of brief periods of ischemia to an organ or tissue with the aim of inducing protection from ischemia in a distant organ. It was first developed as a cardioprotective strategy but has been increasingly investigated as a neuroprotective intervention. The mechanisms by which RIC achieves neuroprotection are incompletely understood. Preclinical studies focus on the hypothesis that RIC can protect the brain from ischemia reperfusion (IR) injury following the restoration of blood flow after occlusion of a large cerebral artery. However, increasingly, a role of chronic RIC (CRIC) is being investigated as a means of promoting recovery following an ischemic insult to the brain. The recent publication of two large, randomized control trials has provided promise that RIC could improve functional outcomes after acute ischemic stroke, and that there may be a role for CRIC in the prevention of recurrent stroke. Although less developed, there is also proof-of-concept to suggest that RIC may be used to reduce vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage or improve cognitive outcomes in vascular dementia. As a cheap, well-tolerated and almost universally applicable intervention, the motivation for investigating possible benefit of RIC in patients with cerebrovascular disease is great. In this review, we shall review the current evidence for RIC as applied to cerebrovascular disease.

Baseline neurologic deficit and efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning after acute ischemic stroke: A post hoc analysis of RICAMIS

RICAMIS (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03740971) trial has demonstrated efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) in acute ischemic stroke, but whether baseline NIHSS score can affect outcomes in stroke remains unclear. We conducted a post hoc analysis of RICAMIS to investigate the issue. Patients included in RICAMIS were divided into three groups based on baseline NIHSS score. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome at 90 days, defined as mRS score of 0-1. Compared with patients receiving usual care, we investigated association of RIC effect with outcomes in each group and interaction between RIC effect and stroke severity. Among 1776 patients, 1255 were assigned into NIHSS score 6-8 group, 402 into NIHSS score 9-12 group, and 119 into NIHSS score 13-16 group. A higher proportion of primary outcome was found associated with RIC in NIHSS score 9-12 group (adjusted risk difference [RD], 14.6 ​%; 95 ​% CI, 5.0 ​%-24.2 ​%; P ​= ​0.003), but no significant association was found in NIHSS score 6-8 group (adjusted RD, 2.3 ​%; 95 ​% CI, -2.5 ​%-7.2 ​%; P ​= ​0.34), or in NIHSS score 13-16 group (adjusted RD, 9.7 ​%; 95 ​% CI, -7.5 ​%-26.9 ​%; P ​= ​0.27). There was a significant interaction between RIC effect and stroke severity when analysis was performed between NIHSS score 6-8 and 9-12 groups (P ​= ​0.04), but not between NIHSS score 9-12 and 13-16 groups (P ​= ​0.57). Current study firstly reported patients with NIHSS score 9-12 may get more benefit from RIC after stroke with respect to excellent functional outcome at 90 days.

Safety and efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning combined with endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion of anterior circulation: A multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled clinical trial (SERIC-EVT): Study protocol

RATIONALE/AIM

Many patients undergoing successful recanalization after endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) do not have a good outcome; additional neuroprotection might benefit this group. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) stimulates endogenous protective mechanisms and may have a neuroprotective in acute brain ischemia. The safety and efficacy of RIC combined with endovascular thrombectomy (SERIC-EVT) trial is investigating the safety and efficacy of RIC for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who underwent EVT due to large vessel occlusion of the anterior circulation.

METHODS

SERIC-EVT is a multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled, and blinded endpoint clinical trial. Patients are recruited from 10 hospitals in Jilin Province, Northeast China. Patients with anterior circulation AIS undergoing EVT due to large vessel occlusion are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to RIC or sham-RIC. Participants will receive standard medical treatment and an inflation pressure of 200 mmHg (RIC group) or 60 mmHg (sham-RIC group) twice daily for seven consecutive days.

STUDY OUTCOMES

The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 on day 90. Secondary outcome measures include the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, Barthel Index, and mRS scores obtained at 24 h, 7 days, 30 ± 3 days, and 90 ± 3 days post-EVT, recanalization rate, expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage post-EVT. Mortality and all adverse events, including skin changes and pain scores, within the first 90 days will be used as safety outcome measures.

SAMPLE SIZE ESTIMATES

Based on previous studies, we estimate a 14% difference in functional independence (the mRS ⩽2) between RIC and sham-RIC groups. Considering a significance level of 5% and power of 80%, and one-fifth of patients lost to follow up, the planned sample size is 498 patients (249 per group).

DISCUSSION

RIC might be a strategy that improves 3-month clinical outcomes in AIS patients who have undergone EVT due to large vessel occlusion of anterior circulation. SERIC-EVT will determine whether this is the case.

Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning vs Usual Care on Neurologic Function in Patients With Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke: The RICAMIS Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Preclinical and clinical studies have suggested a neuroprotective effect of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC), which involves repeated occlusion/release cycles on bilateral upper limb arteries; however, robust evidence in patients with ischemic stroke is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of RIC for acute moderate ischemic stroke.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter, open-label, blinded-end point, randomized clinical trial including 1893 patients with acute moderate ischemic stroke was conducted at 55 hospitals in China from December 26, 2018, through January 19, 2021, and the date of final follow-up was April 19, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Eligible patients were randomly assigned within 48 hours after symptom onset to receive treatment with RIC (using a pneumatic electronic device and consisting of 5 cycles of cuff inflation for 5 minutes and deflation for 5 minutes to the bilateral upper limbs to 200 mm Hg) for 10 to 14 days as an adjunct to guideline-based treatment (n = 922) or guideline-based treatment alone (n = 971).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was excellent functional outcome at 90 days, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1. All end points had blinded assessment and were analyzed on a full analysis set.

RESULTS

Among 1893 eligible patients with acute moderate ischemic stroke who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 65 [10.3] years; 606 women [34.1%]), 1776 (93.8%) completed the trial. The number with excellent functional outcome at 90 days was 582 (67.4%) in the RIC group and 566 (62.0%) in the control group (risk difference, 5.4% [95% CI, 1.0%-9.9%]; odds ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.05-1.54]; P = .02). The proportion of patients with any adverse events was 6.8% (59/863) in the RIC group and 5.6% (51/913) in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among adults with acute moderate ischemic stroke, treatment with remote ischemic conditioning compared with usual care significantly increased the likelihood of excellent neurologic function at 90 days. However, these findings require replication in another trial before concluding efficacy for this intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03740971.

Neuroprotection by Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Rodent Models of Focal Ischemia: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a promising neuroprotective therapy for ischemic stroke. Preclinical studies investigating RIC have shown RIC reduced infarct volume, but clinical trials have been equivocal. Therefore, the efficacy of RIC in reducing infarct volume and quality of current literature needs to be evaluated to identify knowledge gaps to support future clinical trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical literature involving RIC in rodent models of focal ischemia. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019145441). Eligibility criteria included rat or mice models of focal ischemia that received RIC to a limb either before, during, or after stroke. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from 1946 to August 2019. Risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE risk of bias tool along with construct validity. Seventy-two studies were included in the systematic review. RIC was shown to reduce infarct volume (SMD - 2.19; CI - 2.48 to - 1.91) when compared to stroke-only controls and no adverse events were reported with regard to RIC. Remote ischemic conditioning was shown to be most efficacious in males (SMD - 2.26; CI - 2.58 to - 1.94) and when delivered poststroke (SMD - 1.34; CI - 1.95 to - 0.73). A high risk of bias was present; thus, measures of efficacy may be exaggerated. A limitation is the poor methodological reporting of many studies, resulting in unclear construct validity. We identified several important, but under investigated topics including the efficacy of RIC in different stroke models, varied infarct sizes and location, and potential sex differences.