The effect of remote ischemic conditioning on mortality after kidney transplantation: the systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Eunji Ko, Ha Yeon Park, Choon Hak Lim, Hyun Jung Kim, Yookyung Jang, Hyunyoung Seong, Yun Hee Kim, Hyeon Ju Shin
{"title":"The effect of remote ischemic conditioning on mortality after kidney transplantation: the systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Eunji Ko, Ha Yeon Park, Choon Hak Lim, Hyun Jung Kim, Yookyung Jang, Hyunyoung Seong, Yun Hee Kim, Hyeon Ju Shin","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02618-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ischemic-reperfusion injury resulting from kidney transplantation declines the post-transplant graft function. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is known to be able to reduce the criticality of ischemic reperfusion injury. This study aimed to meta-analyze whether the application of remote ischemic conditioning to kidney transplantation patients improves clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Researchers included randomized controlled studies of the application of RIC to either kidney donors or recipients. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The risk of bias was evaluated using RoB 2.0. The primary outcome was mortality after transplantation. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of delayed graft function, graft rejection, and post-transplant laboratory results. All outcomes were integrated by RevMan 5.4.1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 90 papers, 10 articles (8 studies, 1977 patients) were suitable for inclusion criteria. Mortality collected at all time points did not show a significant difference between the groups. Three-month mortality (RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 0.13-75.51, P = 0.49) tended to increase in the RIC group, but 12-month (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.14-3.45, P = 0.67) or final-reported mortality (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-1.06, P = 0.07) was higher in the sham group than the RIC group. There was no significant difference between the RIC and sham group in delayed graft function (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.30-1.35, P = 0.24), graft rejection (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.73-1.73, P = 0.59), and the rate of time required for a 50% reduction in baseline serum creatinine concentration of less than 24 h (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.61-1.56, P = 0.93).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>It could not be concluded that the application of RIC is beneficial to kidney transplantation patients. However, it is noteworthy that long-term mortality tended to decrease in the RIC group. Since there were many limitations due to the small number of included articles, researchers hope that large-scale randomized controlled trials will be included in the future.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022336565.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"201"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11285121/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02618-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Ischemic-reperfusion injury resulting from kidney transplantation declines the post-transplant graft function. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is known to be able to reduce the criticality of ischemic reperfusion injury. This study aimed to meta-analyze whether the application of remote ischemic conditioning to kidney transplantation patients improves clinical outcomes.
Methods: Researchers included randomized controlled studies of the application of RIC to either kidney donors or recipients. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The risk of bias was evaluated using RoB 2.0. The primary outcome was mortality after transplantation. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of delayed graft function, graft rejection, and post-transplant laboratory results. All outcomes were integrated by RevMan 5.4.1.
Results: Out of 90 papers, 10 articles (8 studies, 1977 patients) were suitable for inclusion criteria. Mortality collected at all time points did not show a significant difference between the groups. Three-month mortality (RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 0.13-75.51, P = 0.49) tended to increase in the RIC group, but 12-month (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.14-3.45, P = 0.67) or final-reported mortality (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-1.06, P = 0.07) was higher in the sham group than the RIC group. There was no significant difference between the RIC and sham group in delayed graft function (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.30-1.35, P = 0.24), graft rejection (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.73-1.73, P = 0.59), and the rate of time required for a 50% reduction in baseline serum creatinine concentration of less than 24 h (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.61-1.56, P = 0.93).
Conclusions: It could not be concluded that the application of RIC is beneficial to kidney transplantation patients. However, it is noteworthy that long-term mortality tended to decrease in the RIC group. Since there were many limitations due to the small number of included articles, researchers hope that large-scale randomized controlled trials will be included in the future.
期刊介绍：
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
