Remote ischemic preconditioning and cognitive dysfunction following coronary artery bypass grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 1.3 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-14 DOI:10.4103/sja.sja_751_23
Reynold Siburian, Rizki Fadillah, Obieda Altobaishat, Tungki Pratama Umar, Ismail Dilawar, Dimas Tri Nugroho
{"title":"Remote ischemic preconditioning and cognitive dysfunction following coronary artery bypass grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Reynold Siburian, Rizki Fadillah, Obieda Altobaishat, Tungki Pratama Umar, Ismail Dilawar, Dimas Tri Nugroho","doi":"10.4103/sja.sja_751_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological issue following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-assisted heart surgery. Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) increases the tolerance of vital organs to ischemia/reperfusion injury, leading to reduced brain injury biomarkers and improved cognitive control. However, the exact mechanisms underlying RIPC's neuroprotective effects remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to explore the hypothesis that RIPC lowers neurocognitive dysfunction in patients undergoing CPB surgery.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>All relevant studies were searched in PubMed, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane Library database. Assessment of study quality was carried out by two independent reviewers individually using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB-2) tool. Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model due to low heterogeneity among studies, except for those with substantial heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of five studies with 1,843 participants were included in the meta-analysis. RIPC was not associated with reduced incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (five RCTs, odds ratio [OR:] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.11) nor its improvement (three RCTs, OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50-1.27). In addition, the analysis of the effect of RIPC on specific cognitive function tests found that pooled SMD for RAVLT 1-3 and RAVLT LT were -0.07 (95% CI: -0.25,012) and -0.04 (95% CI: -0.25-0.12), respectively, and for VFT semantic and phonetic were -0.15 (95% CI: -0.33-0.04) and 0.11 (95% CI: -0.40-0.62), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The effect of RIPC on cognitive performance in CABG patients remained insignificant. Results from previous studies were unable to justify the use of RIPC as a neuroprotective agent in CABG patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":21533,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11033882/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_751_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological issue following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-assisted heart surgery. Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) increases the tolerance of vital organs to ischemia/reperfusion injury, leading to reduced brain injury biomarkers and improved cognitive control. However, the exact mechanisms underlying RIPC's neuroprotective effects remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to explore the hypothesis that RIPC lowers neurocognitive dysfunction in patients undergoing CPB surgery.

Method: All relevant studies were searched in PubMed, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane Library database. Assessment of study quality was carried out by two independent reviewers individually using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB-2) tool. Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model due to low heterogeneity among studies, except for those with substantial heterogeneity.

Results: A total of five studies with 1,843 participants were included in the meta-analysis. RIPC was not associated with reduced incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (five RCTs, odds ratio [OR:] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.11) nor its improvement (three RCTs, OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50-1.27). In addition, the analysis of the effect of RIPC on specific cognitive function tests found that pooled SMD for RAVLT 1-3 and RAVLT LT were -0.07 (95% CI: -0.25,012) and -0.04 (95% CI: -0.25-0.12), respectively, and for VFT semantic and phonetic were -0.15 (95% CI: -0.33-0.04) and 0.11 (95% CI: -0.40-0.62), respectively.

Conclusion: The effect of RIPC on cognitive performance in CABG patients remained insignificant. Results from previous studies were unable to justify the use of RIPC as a neuroprotective agent in CABG patients.

冠状动脉旁路移植术后的远程缺血预处理和认知功能障碍:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
导言:术后认知功能障碍(POCD)是心肺旁路(CPB)辅助心脏手术后常见的神经问题。远程缺血预处理(RIPC)可提高重要器官对缺血/再灌注损伤的耐受性,从而减少脑损伤生物标志物并改善认知控制。然而,RIPC 神经保护作用的确切机制仍不清楚。本系统综述旨在探讨 RIPC 可降低 CPB 手术患者神经认知功能障碍的假设:方法:在 PubMed、ScienceDirect、EBSCOhost、Google Scholar、Semantic Scholar、Scopus 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中检索所有相关研究。两名独立审稿人分别使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险(RoB-2)工具对研究质量进行评估。由于各研究之间的异质性较低,因此采用固定效应模型进行了 Meta 分析,但异质性较大的研究除外:共有 5 项研究、1,843 名参与者被纳入荟萃分析。RIPC 与术后认知功能障碍发生率的降低(5 项 RCT,几率比 [OR:] 0.79,95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.56-1.11)或改善(3 项 RCT,OR:0.80,95% CI:0.50-1.27)无关。此外,在分析RIPC对特定认知功能测试的影响时发现,RAVLT 1-3和RAVLT LT的集合SMD分别为-0.07(95% CI:-0.25,012)和-0.04(95% CI:-0.25-0.12),VFT语义和语音的集合SMD分别为-0.15(95% CI:-0.33-0.04)和0.11(95% CI:-0.40-0.62):结论:RIPC 对 CABG 患者认知能力的影响仍不显著。结论:RIPC 对 CABG 患者认知能力的影响仍不显著,之前的研究结果无法证明 RIPC 可作为 CABG 患者的神经保护剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
141
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信