{"title":"吸烟状况和远程缺血调节的疗效:对RICAMIS试验的二次分析","authors":"Xian-Wen Zhang, Yu Cui, Hui-Sheng Chen","doi":"10.1136/svn-2025-004349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) is a potential non-invasive neuroprotective strategy, but it remains unclear whether its efficacy is influenced by smoking status. This study explored the impact of smoking status on the therapeutic effect of RIC in patients with acute moderate ischaemic stroke through a post hoc subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on the data from the Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke trial, 1717 patients with moderate stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 6-16) who did not undergo reperfusion therapy were included and categorised into current smokers (n=505) and non-smokers (n=1212) based on their smoking status. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either RIC (administered twice daily for 14 days) or standard treatment. The primary outcome was excellent functional prognosis at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale, mRS scores 0-1). Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the interaction between smoking status and RIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among non-smokers, RIC significantly increased the proportion of patients achieving mRS 0-1 at 90 days (69.1% vs 62.8%; adjusted OR 1.487, 95% CI 1.143 to 1.936; p=0.003). Among current smokers, there was no significant difference in the proportion of mRS 0-1 at 90 days compared with the control group (64.1% vs 62.1%; adjusted OR 1.154, 95% CI 0.791 to 1.684; p=0.46). The interaction analysis revealed no significant association between smoking status and RIC efficacy (P for interaction=0.50).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this analysis, RIC significantly improved the excellent functional prognosis of non-smoking stroke patients, but had no significant benefit for current smokers, suggesting that smoking may attenuate RIC efficacy.</p><p><strong>Trial registeration number: </strong>NCT03740971.</p>","PeriodicalId":48733,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Smoking status and the efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning: a secondary analysis of the RICAMIS trial.\",\"authors\":\"Xian-Wen Zhang, Yu Cui, Hui-Sheng Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/svn-2025-004349\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) is a potential non-invasive neuroprotective strategy, but it remains unclear whether its efficacy is influenced by smoking status. This study explored the impact of smoking status on the therapeutic effect of RIC in patients with acute moderate ischaemic stroke through a post hoc subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on the data from the Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke trial, 1717 patients with moderate stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 6-16) who did not undergo reperfusion therapy were included and categorised into current smokers (n=505) and non-smokers (n=1212) based on their smoking status. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either RIC (administered twice daily for 14 days) or standard treatment. The primary outcome was excellent functional prognosis at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale, mRS scores 0-1). Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the interaction between smoking status and RIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among non-smokers, RIC significantly increased the proportion of patients achieving mRS 0-1 at 90 days (69.1% vs 62.8%; adjusted OR 1.487, 95% CI 1.143 to 1.936; p=0.003). Among current smokers, there was no significant difference in the proportion of mRS 0-1 at 90 days compared with the control group (64.1% vs 62.1%; adjusted OR 1.154, 95% CI 0.791 to 1.684; p=0.46). The interaction analysis revealed no significant association between smoking status and RIC efficacy (P for interaction=0.50).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this analysis, RIC significantly improved the excellent functional prognosis of non-smoking stroke patients, but had no significant benefit for current smokers, suggesting that smoking may attenuate RIC efficacy.</p><p><strong>Trial registeration number: </strong>NCT03740971.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48733,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Investigative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Investigative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2025-004349\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2025-004349","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:远程缺血调节(RIC)是一种潜在的非侵入性神经保护策略,但其疗效是否受吸烟状况的影响尚不清楚。本研究通过事后亚组分析探讨吸烟状况对急性中度缺血性脑卒中患者RIC治疗效果的影响。方法:基于急性中度缺血性脑卒中远程缺血适应试验的数据,纳入1717例未接受再灌注治疗的中度脑卒中患者(美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分6-16分),根据吸烟状况分为当前吸烟者(n=505)和非吸烟者(n=1212)。患者被随机分配接受RIC(每天两次,持续14天)或标准治疗。主要结局是90天功能预后良好(改良Rankin量表,mRS评分0-1)。采用多变量回归分析评估吸烟状况与RIC之间的相互作用。结果:在非吸烟者中,RIC显著增加了90天mRS达到0-1的患者比例(69.1% vs 62.8%;调整OR 1.487, 95% CI 1.143 ~ 1.936; p=0.003)。在当前吸烟者中,90天mRS 0-1的比例与对照组相比无显著差异(64.1% vs 62.1%;调整OR 1.154, 95% CI 0.791 ~ 1.684; p=0.46)。相互作用分析显示吸烟状况与RIC疗效无显著相关性(相互作用P =0.50)。结论:在本分析中,RIC显著改善了非吸烟脑卒中患者良好的功能预后,但对当前吸烟者没有明显的益处,提示吸烟可能会减弱RIC的疗效。试验注册号:NCT03740971。
Smoking status and the efficacy of remote ischaemic conditioning: a secondary analysis of the RICAMIS trial.
Background: Remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) is a potential non-invasive neuroprotective strategy, but it remains unclear whether its efficacy is influenced by smoking status. This study explored the impact of smoking status on the therapeutic effect of RIC in patients with acute moderate ischaemic stroke through a post hoc subgroup analysis.
Methods: Based on the data from the Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Acute Moderate Ischemic Stroke trial, 1717 patients with moderate stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 6-16) who did not undergo reperfusion therapy were included and categorised into current smokers (n=505) and non-smokers (n=1212) based on their smoking status. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either RIC (administered twice daily for 14 days) or standard treatment. The primary outcome was excellent functional prognosis at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale, mRS scores 0-1). Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the interaction between smoking status and RIC.
Results: Among non-smokers, RIC significantly increased the proportion of patients achieving mRS 0-1 at 90 days (69.1% vs 62.8%; adjusted OR 1.487, 95% CI 1.143 to 1.936; p=0.003). Among current smokers, there was no significant difference in the proportion of mRS 0-1 at 90 days compared with the control group (64.1% vs 62.1%; adjusted OR 1.154, 95% CI 0.791 to 1.684; p=0.46). The interaction analysis revealed no significant association between smoking status and RIC efficacy (P for interaction=0.50).
Conclusions: In this analysis, RIC significantly improved the excellent functional prognosis of non-smoking stroke patients, but had no significant benefit for current smokers, suggesting that smoking may attenuate RIC efficacy.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Investigative Medicine (JIM) is the official publication of the American Federation for Medical Research. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes high-quality original articles and reviews in the areas of basic, clinical, and translational medical research.
JIM publishes on all topics and specialty areas that are critical to the conduct of the entire spectrum of biomedical research: from the translation of clinical observations at the bedside, to basic and animal research to clinical research and the implementation of innovative medical care.