Fernando Pico1,2,3, Bertrand Lapergue2,4, Marc Ferrigno5,6, Charlotte Rosso7,8, Elena Meseguer9, Marie-Laure Chadenat1, Frederic Bourdain4, Michael Obadia10, Catherine Hirel1,2, Duc Long Duong1, Sandrine Deltour7, Philippe Aegerter11,12, Julien Labreuche13, Amina Cattenoy14, Didier Smadja15, Hassan Hosseini16, Benoit Guillon17, Valérie Wolff18, Yves Samson7, Charlotte Cordonnier5,6, Pierre Amarenco3,9. 1. Department of Neurology and Stroke Center, Versailles Mignot Hospital, Versailles, France. 2. University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines and Paris-Saclay University, Saint-Aubin, France. 3. Laboratoire de Recherche Vasculaire Translationnelle, Inserm U1148, Paris, France. 4. Neurology and Stroke Center, Hôpital Foch, Suresnes, France. 5. Department of Degenerative and Vascular Cognitive Disorders, Inserm U1171, Université de Lille, Lille, France. 6. Department of Neurology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France. 7. Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Service des Urgences Cerebro-Vasculaires, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France. 8. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Inserm U1127, Unite Mixte de Recherche 7225, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle Epiniere, Sorbonne Universite, Paris, France. 9. Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Department of Neurology and Stroke Center, Bichat University Hospital, Universite Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Cite, Paris, France. 10. Neurology and Stroke Center, Fondation Ophtalmologique Adolphe de Rothschild, Paris, France. 11. Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Vieillissement et Maladies Chroniques, IndianaSERM, Unité Mixte de Recherche 1168, Universite de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Versailles, France. 12. Department of Biostatistics, Université de Lille, Lille, France. 13. Unité de Recherche EA 2694-Sante Publique: Epidemiologie et Qualite des Soins, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France. 14. Délégation à la Recherche Clinique, Versailles Mignot Hospital, Versailles, France. 15. Stroke Unit, Centre Hospitalier Sud Francilien, Corbeil-Essonnes, France. 16. Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Stroke Center, Henri Mondor Hospital, Université Paris-Est Créteil, Creteil, France. 17. Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Nantes, Nantes, France. 18. Stroke Unit, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Abstract
Importance: Treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning has been reported to reduce brain infarction volume in animal models of stroke. Whether this neuroprotective effect was observed in patients with acute ischemic stroke remains unknown. Objective: To determine whether treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning administered to the leg of patients with acute ischemic stroke can reduce brain infarction volume growth. Design, Setting, and Participants: This proof-of-concept multicenter prospective randomized open-label with blinded end point clinical trial was performed from January 12, 2015, to May 2, 2018. Patients were recruited from 11 stroke centers in France. Of the 188 patients who receivedmagnetic resonance imaging within 6 hours of symptom onset and were confirmed to have carotid ischemic stroke, 93 were randomized to receive treatment with lower-limb remote ischemic perconditioning in addition to standard care (the intervention group), and 95 were randomized to receive standard care alone (the control group). Interventions: Randomization on a 1:1 ratio to receive treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning (4 cycles of 5-minute inflations and 5-minute deflations to the thigh to 110 mmHg above systolic blood pressure) in addition to standard care or standard care alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The change in brain infarction volume growth between baseline and 24 hours, measured by a diffusion-weighted sequence of magnetic resonance imaging scans of the brain. Results: A total of 188 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.2 [15.7] years; 98 men [52.1%]) were included in this intention-to-treat analysis. At hospital admission, the median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 6-16) and the median brain infarction volume was 11.4 cm3 (IQR, 3.6-35.8 cm3); 164 patients (87.2%) receivedintravenous thrombolysis, and 64 patients (34.0%) underwent mechanical thrombectomy. The median increase in brain infarction growth was 0.30 cm3 (IQR, 0.11-0.48 cm3) in the intervention group and 0.37 cm3 (IQR, 0.19-0.55 cm3) in the control group (mean between-group difference on loge-transformed change, -0.07; 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.18; P = .57). An excellent outcome (defined as a score of 0-1 on the 90-day modified Rankin Scale or a score equal to the prestroke modified Rankin Scale score) was observed in 46 of 90 patients (51.1%) in the intervention group and 37 of 91 patients (40.7%) in the control group (P = .12). No significant differences in 90-day mortality were observed between the intervention and control groups (14 of 90 patients; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 15.8% vs 10 of 91 patients; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 10.4%, respectively; P = .45) or with symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (4 of 88 patients [4.5%] in both groups; P = .97). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning, during or after reperfusion therapies, had no significant effect on brain infarction volume growth at 24 hours after symptom onset. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02189928.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning has been reported to reduce brain infarction volume in animal models of stroke. Whether this neuroprotective effect was observed in patients with acute ischemic stroke remains unknown. Objective: To determine whether treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning administered to the leg of patients with acute ischemic stroke can reduce brain infarction volume growth. Design, Setting, and Participants: This proof-of-concept multicenter prospective randomized open-label with blinded end point clinical trial was performed from January 12, 2015, to May 2, 2018. Patients were recruited from 11 stroke centers in France. Of the 188 patients who received magnetic resonance imaging within 6 hours of symptom onset and were confirmed to have carotid ischemic stroke, 93 were randomized to receive treatment with lower-limb remote ischemic perconditioning in addition to standard care (the intervention group), and 95 were randomized to receive standard care alone (the control group). Interventions: Randomization on a 1:1 ratio to receive treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning (4 cycles of 5-minute inflations and 5-minute deflations to the thigh to 110 mm Hg above systolic blood pressure) in addition to standard care or standard care alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The change in brain infarction volume growth between baseline and 24 hours, measured by a diffusion-weighted sequence of magnetic resonance imaging scans of the brain. Results: A total of 188 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.2 [15.7] years; 98 men [52.1%]) were included in this intention-to-treat analysis. At hospital admission, the median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 6-16) and the median brain infarction volume was 11.4 cm3 (IQR, 3.6-35.8 cm3); 164 patients (87.2%) received intravenous thrombolysis, and 64 patients (34.0%) underwent mechanical thrombectomy. The median increase in brain infarction growth was 0.30 cm3 (IQR, 0.11-0.48 cm3) in the intervention group and 0.37 cm3 (IQR, 0.19-0.55 cm3) in the control group (mean between-group difference on loge-transformed change, -0.07; 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.18; P = .57). An excellent outcome (defined as a score of 0-1 on the 90-day modified Rankin Scale or a score equal to the prestroke modified Rankin Scale score) was observed in 46 of 90 patients (51.1%) in the intervention group and 37 of 91 patients (40.7%) in the control group (P = .12). No significant differences in 90-day mortality were observed between the intervention and control groups (14 of 90 patients; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 15.8% vs 10 of 91 patients; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 10.4%, respectively; P = .45) or with symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (4 of 88 patients [4.5%] in both groups; P = .97). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning, during or after reperfusion therapies, had no significant effect on brain infarction volume growth at 24 hours after symptom onset. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02189928.
Authors: Timothy J England; Amanda Hedstrom; Saoirse O'Sullivan; Richard Donnelly; David A Barrett; Sarir Sarmad; Nikola Sprigg; Philip M Bath Journal: Stroke Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Hans Erik Bøtker; Rajesh Kharbanda; Michael R Schmidt; Morten Bøttcher; Anne K Kaltoft; Christian J Terkelsen; Kim Munk; Niels H Andersen; Troels M Hansen; Sven Trautner; Jens Flensted Lassen; Evald Høj Christiansen; Lars R Krusell; Steen D Kristensen; Leif Thuesen; Søren S Nielsen; Michael Rehling; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Andrew N Redington; Torsten T Nielsen Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-02-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: C Rosso; Y Attal; S Deltour; N Hevia-Montiel; S Lehéricy; S Crozier; D Dormont; S Baillet; Y Samson Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-03-31 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Peter J Mitchell; Timothy J Kleinig; Helen M Dewey; Leonid Churilov; Nawaf Yassi; Bernard Yan; Richard J Dowling; Mark W Parsons; Thomas J Oxley; Teddy Y Wu; Mark Brooks; Marion A Simpson; Ferdinand Miteff; Christopher R Levi; Martin Krause; Timothy J Harrington; Kenneth C Faulder; Brendan S Steinfort; Miriam Priglinger; Timothy Ang; Rebecca Scroop; P Alan Barber; Ben McGuinness; Tissa Wijeratne; Thanh G Phan; Winston Chong; Ronil V Chandra; Christopher F Bladin; Monica Badve; Henry Rice; Laetitia de Villiers; Henry Ma; Patricia M Desmond; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Edward C Jauch; Jeffrey L Saver; Harold P Adams; Askiel Bruno; J J Buddy Connors; Bart M Demaerschalk; Pooja Khatri; Paul W McMullan; Adnan I Qureshi; Kenneth Rosenfield; Phillip A Scott; Debbie R Summers; David Z Wang; Max Wintermark; Howard Yonas Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; Mayank Goyal; Aad van der Lugt; Bijoy K Menon; Charles B L M Majoie; Diederik W Dippel; Bruce C Campbell; Raul G Nogueira; Andrew M Demchuk; Alejandro Tomasello; Pere Cardona; Thomas G Devlin; Donald F Frei; Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont; Olvert A Berkhemer; Tudor G Jovin; Adnan H Siddiqui; Wim H van Zwam; Stephen M Davis; Carlos Castaño; Biggya L Sapkota; Puck S Fransen; Carlos Molina; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Ángel Chamorro; Hester Lingsma; Frank L Silver; Geoffrey A Donnan; Ashfaq Shuaib; Scott Brown; Bruce Stouch; Peter J Mitchell; Antoni Davalos; Yvo B W E M Roos; Michael D Hill Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Max Wintermark; Gregory W Albers; Joseph P Broderick; Andrew M Demchuk; Jochen B Fiebach; Jens Fiehler; James C Grotta; Gary Houser; Tudor G Jovin; Kennedy R Lees; Michael H Lev; David S Liebeskind; Marie Luby; Keith W Muir; Mark W Parsons; Rüdiger von Kummer; Joanna M Wardlaw; Ona Wu; Albert J Yoo; Andrei V Alexandrov; Jeffry R Alger; Richard I Aviv; Roland Bammer; Jean-Claude Baron; Fernando Calamante; Bruce C V Campbell; Trevor C Carpenter; Søren Christensen; William A Copen; Colin P Derdeyn; E Clarke Haley; Pooja Khatri; Kohsuke Kudo; Maarten G Lansberg; Lawrence L Latour; Ting-Yim Lee; Richard Leigh; Weili Lin; Patrick Lyden; Grant Mair; Bijoy K Menon; Patrik Michel; Robert Mikulik; Raul G Nogueira; Leif Ostergaard; Salvador Pedraza; Christian H Riedel; Howard A Rowley; Pina C Sanelli; Makoto Sasaki; Jeffrey L Saver; Pamela W Schaefer; Peter D Schellinger; Georgios Tsivgoulis; Lawrence R Wechsler; Philip M White; Greg Zaharchuk; Osama O Zaidat; Stephen M Davis; Geoffrey A Donnan; Anthony J Furlan; Werner Hacke; Dong-Wha Kang; Chelsea Kidwell; Vincent N Thijs; Götz Thomalla; Steven J Warach Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-07-16 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: David C Hess; Mohammad Badruzzaman Khan; Pradip Kamat; Kumar Vaibhav; Krishnan M Dhandapani; Babak Baban; Jennifer L Waller; Md Nasrul Hoda; Rolf Ankerlund Blauenfeldt; Grethe Andersen Journal: Cond Med Date: 2021-06
Authors: Francisco Purroy; Simone Beretta; Timothy J England; David Charles Hess; Fernando Pico; Ashfaq Shuaib Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Shereen Nizari; Marina Basalay; Philippa Chapman; Nils Korte; Alla Korsak; Isabel N Christie; Shefeeq M Theparambil; Sean M Davidson; Frank Reimann; Stefan Trapp; Derek M Yellon; Alexander V Gourine Journal: Basic Res Cardiol Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 17.165
Authors: Inês Mollet; João Pedro Marto; Marcelo Mendonça; Miguel Viana Baptista; Helena L A Vieira Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2021-10-22 Impact factor: 5.682
Authors: E M Vos; V J Geraedts; A van der Lugt; D W J Dippel; M J H Wermer; J Hofmeijer; A C G M van Es; Y B W E M Roos; C M P C D Peeters-Scholte; I R van den Wijngaard Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Tingting Gu; Jesper Just; Katrine Tang Stenz; Yan Yan; Peter Sieljacks; Jakob Wang; Thomas Skjaerlund Groennebaek; Jesper Emil Jakobsgaard; Emil Rindom; Jon Herskind; Anders Gravholt; Thomas Ravn Lassen; Mathias Jørgensen; Rikke Bæk; Eugenio Gutiérrez-Jiménez; Nina Kerting Iversen; Peter Mondrup Rasmussen; Jens Randel Nyengaard; Malene Møller Jørgensen; Frank de Paoli; Hans Erik Bøtker; Jørgen Kjems; Kristian Vissing; Kim Ryun Drasbek Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-03-19 Impact factor: 5.923