Comparison of Direct and Remote Ischaemic Preconditioning of Renal Ischaemia Reperfusion Injury in Rats

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 < 0.001; mean difference (MD) = 2.74, confidence interval (CI): 1.41 to 4.06; I 2 = 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 < 0.001; MD = 0.10, CI: 0.05 to 0.15, I 2 = 0; 2-day postoperative: P = 0.006; MD = 0.41, CI: 0.12 to 0.70, I 2 = 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.

Which remote ischemic preconditioning protocol is favorable in renal ischemia-reperfusion injury in the rat?

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) in renal ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury is still unclear. We aimed to compare early- and delayed-effect RIPC with hematological, microcirculatory and histomorphological parameters.

METHODS

In anesthetized male CrI:WI Control rats (n = 7) laparotomy and femoral artery cannulation were performed. In I/R group (n = 7) additionally a 45-minute unilateral renal ischemia with 120-minute reperfusion was induced. The right hind-limb was strangulated for 3×10 minutes (10-minute intermittent reperfusion) 1 hour (RIPC-1 group, n = 7) or 24 hour (RIPC-24 group, n = 6) prior to the I/R. Hemodynamic, hematological parameters and organs' surface microcirculation were measured.

RESULTS

Control and I/R group had the highest heart rate (p < 0.05 vs base), while the lowest mean arterial pressure (p < 0.05 vs RIPC-1) were found in the RIPC-24 group. The highest microcirculation values were measured in the I/R group (liver: p < 0.05 vs Control). The leukocyte count increased in I/R group (base: p < 0.05 vs Control), also this group's histological score was the highest (p < 0.05 vs Control). The RIPC-24 group had a significantly lower score than the RIPC-1 (p = 0.0025 vs RIPC-1).

CONCLUSION

Renal I/R caused significant functional and morphological, also in the RIPC groups. According to the histological examination the delayed-effect RIPC method was more effective.