Remote ischemic conditioning for acute stroke patients treated with thrombectomy

Wenbo Zhao, Ruiwen Che, Sijie Li, Changhong Ren, Chuanhui Li, Chuanjie Wu, Hui Lu, Jian Chen, Jiangang Duan, Ran Meng, Xunming Ji, Wenbo Zhao, Ruiwen Che, Sijie Li, Changhong Ren, Chuanhui Li, Chuanjie Wu, Hui Lu, Jian Chen, Jiangang Duan, Ran Meng, Xunming Ji

Abstract

Objective: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has been demonstrated to be safe and feasible for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS), as well as for those receiving intravenous thrombolysis. We assessed the safety and feasibility of RIC for AIS patients undergoing endovascular treatment (ET).

Methods: We conducted a pilot study with patients with AIS who were suspected of having an emergent large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation and who were scheduled for ET within 6 hours of ictus. Four cycles of RIC were performed before recanalization, immediately following recanalization, and once daily for the subsequent 7 days. The primary outcome was any serious RIC-related adverse events.

Results: Twenty subjects, aged 66.1 ± 12.1 years, were recruited. No subject experienced serious RIC-related adverse events. The intracranial pressure, cranial perfusion pressure, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, middle cerebral artery peak systolic flow velocity, and pulsatility index did not change significantly before, during, or after the limb ischemia (P > 0.1 for all). Of 80 cycles, 71 (89%) were completed before recanalization and 80 (100%) were completed immediately after recanalization; 444 of 560 cycles (78%) were completed within 7 days posttreatment. No patients had to stop RIC because it affected routine clinical managements. Six subjects (30%) experienced intracerebral hemorrhage, which was symptomatic in one case (5%). At the 3-month follow-up, 11 subjects (55%) had achieved functional independence, and two subjects (10%) died.

Interpretation: RIC appears to be safe and feasible for patients with AIS undergoing ET. Investigations are urgently needed to determine the efficacy of RIC in this patient population.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The distribution of ICP, CPP, MAP, HR, and cerebral hemodynamics before, during, and after limb ischemia. Data presented are mean and standard deviation. LI: limb ischemia; ICP, intracranial pressure; CPP, cranial perfusion pressure; MAP, mean arterial pressure; HR, hear rate; MCA Vs, middle cerebral artery peak systolic blood flow velocity. Repeated‐measures ANOVA was used for statistical test, no significant difference was found (P > 0.1 each).

References

    1. Campbell BC, Hill MD, Rubiera M, et al. Safety and efficacy of solitaire stent thrombectomy: individual patient data meta‐analysis of randomized trials. Stroke 2016;47:798–806.
    1. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. 2018 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American heart association/American stroke association. Stroke 2018;49:e46–e110.
    1. Rai AT, Seldon AE, Boo S, et al. A population‐based incidence of acute large vessel occlusions and thrombectomy eligible patients indicates significant potential for growth of endovascular stroke therapy in the USA. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:722–726.
    1. Albers GW, Marks MP, Kemp S, et al. Thrombectomy for stroke at 6 to 16 hours with selection by perfusion imaging. N Engl J Med 2018;378:708–718.
    1. Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med 2018;378:11–21.
    1. Rocha M, Jovin TG. Fast versus slow progressors of infarct growth in large vessel occlusion stroke: clinical and research implications. Stroke 2017;48:2621–2627.
    1. Zhao W, Shang S, Li C, et al. Long‐term outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients treated with endovascular thrombectomy: a real‐world experience. J Neurol Sci 2018;390:77–83.
    1. Goyal M, Menon BK, van Zwam WH, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy after large‐vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta‐analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet 2016;387:1723–1731.
    1. Fisher M, Saver JL. Future directions of acute ischaemic stroke therapy. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:758–767.
    1. Xunming J. Forward thinking in stroke treatment: advances in cerebrovascular reperfusion and neurorehabilitation. Brain Circ 2015;1:1–2.
    1. Zhao W, Meng R, Ma C, et al. Safety and efficacy of remote ischemic preconditioning in patients with severe carotid artery stenosis before carotid artery stenting: a proof‐of‐concept, randomized controlled trial. Circulation 2017;135:1325–1335.
    1. Hoda MN, Siddiqui S, Herberg S, et al. Remote ischemic perconditioning is effective alone and in combination with intravenous tissue‐type plasminogen activator in murine model of embolic stroke. Stroke 2012;43:2794–2799.
    1. Hougaard KD, Hjort N, Zeidler D, et al. Remote ischemic perconditioning as an adjunct therapy to thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke: a randomized trial. Stroke 2014;45:159–167.
    1. Ren C, Gao M, Dornbos D 3rd, et al. Remote ischemic post‐conditioning reduced brain damage in experimental ischemia/reperfusion injury. Neurol Res 2011;33:514–519.
    1. Ren CH, Wang PC, Wang B, et al. Limb remote ischemic per‐conditioning in combination with post‐conditioning reduces brain damage and promotes neuroglobin expression in the rat brain after ischemic stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2015;33:369–379.
    1. England TJ, Hedstrom A, O'Sullivan S, et al. Recast (remote ischemic conditioning after stroke trial): a pilot randomized placebo controlled phase ii trial in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2017;48:1412–1415.
    1. Tan G, Zhou J, Yuan D, et al. Formula for use of mannitol in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage and high intracranial pressure. Clin Drug Invest 2008;28:81–87.
    1. Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1317–1329.
    1. Simon R. Post‐conditioning and reperfusion injury in the treatment of stroke. Dose‐Response 2014;12:590–599.
    1. Gonzalez NR, Connolly M, Dusick JR, et al. Phase i clinical trial for the feasibility and safety of remote ischemic conditioning for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery 2014;75:590–598.; discussion 598.
    1. Li S, Ma C, Shao G, et al. Safety and feasibility of remote limb ischemic preconditioning in patients with unilateral middle cerebral artery stenosis and healthy volunteers. Cell Transplant 2015;24:1901–1911.
    1. Koch S, Katsnelson M, Dong C, et al. Remote ischemic limb preconditioning after subarachnoid hemorrhage: a phase ib study of safety and feasibility. Stroke 2011;42:1387–1391.
    1. Mistry EA, Mistry AM, Nakawah MO, et al. Systolic blood pressure within 24 hours after thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke correlates with outcome. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e006167.
    1. Leslie‐Mazwi T, Chen M, Yi J, et al. Post‐thrombectomy management of the elvo patient: guidelines from the society of neurointerventional surgery. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:1258–1266.
    1. Lin E, Snell GI, Levvey BJ, et al. Safety, feasibility, and effect of remote ischemic conditioning in patients undergoing lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2014;33:1139–1148.
    1. Savitz SI, Baron JC, Yenari MA, et al. Reconsidering neuroprotection in the reperfusion era. Stroke 2017;48:3413–3419.
    1. Zhao W, Che R, Shang S, et al. Low‐dose tirofiban improves functional outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients treated with endovascular thrombectomy. Stroke 2017;48:3289–3294.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel