Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2020, vol. 29, nr 2, February, p. 189–196

doi: 10.17219/acem/112610

Publication type: original article

Language: English

License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

The clinical utility of remote ischemic preconditioning in protecting against cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: A pilot randomized clinical trial

Karolina Stokfisz1,A,B,D, Anna Ledakowicz-Polak1,A,D,E, Maciej Zagórski2,B,D, Sławomir Jander2,B, Katarzyna Przybylak1,C, Marzenna Zielińska1,A,C,F

1 Intensive Cardiac Therapy Clinic, Department of Invasive Cardiology and Electrocardiology, Medical University of Lodz, Poland

2 Cardiosurgery Clinic, Department of Cardiology and Cardiosurgery, Medical University of Lodz, Poland

Abstract

Background. Cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (CSA-AKI) is a well-known, serious complication and a well-recognized independent risk factor for higher morbidity and mortality among patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) in reducing the incidence of CSA-AKI, measured with the standard creatinine technique and using neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) serum concentrations as a potential new biomarker of kidney damage. The ethics committee of the Medical University of Lodz prospectively approved the protocol (approval No. RNN/286/13/KE). The study was retrospectively registered with the U.S. National Institutes of Health – NIH (29 June 2017; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03205410).
Material and Methods. We conducted a prospective single-center double-blind randomized and controlled tudy. Data was collected from patients admitted to the Cardiosurgery Clinic at the Medical University of Lodz (Poland) between January and December 2014, scheduled for elective cardiac surgery (an off-pump coronary artery bypass). A total of 28 patients were randomized to receive either RIPC (n = 14) or sham RIPC (n = 14). After the induction of anesthesia, the patients assigned to the RIPC group underwent 3 cycles of five-minute inflation to 200 mm Hg and five-minute deflation of the upper-arm cuff. The control group had a deflated cuff placed on the upper arm for 30 min. The authors measured the patients’ serum creatinine concentration to check for the occurrence of a CSA-AKI within 48 h after cardiac surgery, and NGAL serum concentration to check its level within 3 h after the operation.
Results. Fewer patients in RIPC group developed CSA-AKI within 48 h after cardiac surgery than in the control group (29% vs 93%; p = 0.003). Fewer patients in the RIPC group presented an increase in NGAL 3 h after surgery (medians: 124 vs 176.7; p = 0.0003).
Conclusion. In patients undergoing an off-pump coronary artery bypass, RIPC significantly reduces the occurrence of CSA-AKI and protects against increased postoperative NGAL levels.

Key words

neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, remote ischemic preconditioning, cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury

References (42)

  1. Thakar CV, Worley S, Arrigain S, Yared JP, Paganini EP. Improved survival in acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007;50(5):703–711.
  2. Loef BG, Epema AH, Navis G, Ebels T, Stegeman CA. Postoperative renal dysfunction and preoperative left ventricular dysfunction predispose patients to increased long-term mortality after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2009;102(6):749–755. doi:10.1093/bja/aep088
  3. Vandenberghe W, De Loor J, Hoste EA. Diagnosis of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury from functional to damage biomarkers. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2017;30(1):66–75.
  4. Rosner MH, Okusa MD. Acute kidney injury associated with cardiac surgery. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1(1):19–32.
  5. Ostermann ME, Taube D, Morgan CJ, Evans TW. Acute renal failure following cardiopulmonary bypass: A changing picture. Intensive Care Med. 2000;26(5):565–571.
  6. Bellomo R, Auriemma S, Fabbri A, et al. The pathophysiology of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (CSA-AKI). Int J Artif Organs. 2008;31(2):166–178.
  7. Haase M, Haase-Fielitz A, Plass M, et al. Prophylactic perioperative sodium bicarbonate to prevent acute kidney injury following open heart surgery: A multicenter double-blinded randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2013;10(4):e1001426. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001426
  8. Lameire N, van Biesen W, Hoste E, Vanholder R. The prevention of acute kidney injury an in-depth narrative review. Part 2: Drugs in the prevention of acute kidney injury. NDT Plus. 2009;2(1):1–10. doi:10.1093/ndtplus/sfn199
  9. KDIGO AKI Work Group. KDIGO clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury. Kidney Int Suppl. 2012;2:1–138.
  10. Waikar SS, Betensky RA, Bonventre JV. Creatinine as the gold standard for kidney injury biomarker studies? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009;24(11):3263–3265. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfp428
  11. Zhou F, Luo Q, Wang L, Han L. Diagnostic value of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin for early diagnosis of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: A meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49(3):746–755.
  12. Shao X, Tian L, Xu W, et al. Diagnostic value of urinary kidney injury molecule 1 for acute kidney injury: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e84131.
  13. Lin X, Yuan J, Zhao Y, Zha Y. Urine interleukin-18 in prediction of acute kidney injury: A systemic review and meta-analysis. J Nephrol. 2015;28:7–16.
  14. Xu Y, Xie Y, Shao X, Ni Z, Mou S. L-FABP: A novel biomarker of kidney disease. Clin Chim Acta. 2015;445:85–90.
  15. Kashani K, Al-Khafaji A, Ardiles T, et al. Discovery and validation of cell cycle arrest biomarkers in human acute kidney injury. Crit Care. 2013;17(1):R25. doi:10.1186/cc12503
  16. Heller F, Frischmann S, Grunbaum M, Zidek W, Westhoff TH. Urinary calprotectin and the distinction between prerenal and intrinsic acute kidney injury. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6(10):2347–2355.
  17. Lorenzen JM, Kielstein JT, Hafer C, et al. Circulating miR-210 predicts survival in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6(7):1540–1546. doi:10.2215/CJN.00430111
  18. Cruz DN, Bagshaw SM, Maisel A, et al. Use of biomarkers to assess prognosis and guide management of patients with acute kidney injury. Contrib Nephrol. 2013;182:45–64. doi:10.1159/000349965
  19. Przyklenk K, Bauer B, Ovize M, Kloner RA, Whittaker P. Regional ischemic ‘preconditioning’ protects remote virgin myocardium from subsequent sustained coronary occlusion. Circulation. 199;87(3):893–899.
  20. Veighey K, MacAllister R. Ischemic conditioning in kidney transplantation. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2017;22(4):330–336. doi:10.1177/1074248417702893
  21. Er F, Nia AM, Dopp H, et al. Ischemic preconditioning for prevention of contrast medium-induced nephropathy: Randomized pilot RenPro Trial (Renal Protection Trial). Circulation. 2012;126(3):296–303. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.096370
  22. Zimmerman RF, Ezeanuna PU, Kane JC, et al. Ischemic preconditioning at a remote site prevents acute kidney injury in patients following cardiac surgery. Kidney Int. 2011;80(8):861–867.
  23. Ali ZA, Callaghan CJ, Lim E, et al. Remote ischemic preconditioning reduces myocardial and renal injury after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: A randomized controlled trial. Circulation. 2007;116(11 Suppl):I98–105.
  24. Giannopoulos G, Vrachatis DA, Panagopoulou V, Vavuranakis M, Cleman MW, Deftereos S. Remote ischemic conditioning and renal protection. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2017;22(4):321–329. doi:10.1177/1074248417702480
  25. Stokfisz K, Ledakowicz-Polak A, Zagorski M, Zielinska M. Ischaemic preconditioning: Current knowledge and potential future applications after 30 years of experience. Adv Med Sci. 2017;62(2):307–316. doi:10.1016/j.advms.2016.11.006
  26. Miller TE, Roche AM, Mythen M. Fluid management and goal-directed therapy as an adjunct to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS). Can J Anaesth. 2015;62(2):158–168. doi:10.1007/s12630-014-0266-y
  27. Conlon PJ, Crowley J, Stack R, et al. Renal artery stenosis is not associated with the development of acute renal failure following coronary artery bypass grafting. Ren Fail. 2005;27(1):81–86.
  28. Au V, Feit J, Barasch J, Sladen RN, Wagener G. Urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) distinguishes sustained from transient acute kidney injury after general surgery. Kidney Int Rep. 2016;1(1):3–9.
  29. Kashani K, Cheungpasitporn W, Ronco C. Biomarkers of acute kidney injury: The pathway from discovery to clinical adoption. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017;55(8):1074–1089.
  30. Mishra J, Mori K, Ma Q, Kelly C, Barasch J, Devarajan P. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin: A novel early urinary biomarker for cisplatin nephrotoxicity. Am J Nephrol. 2004;24(3):307–315.
  31. Zarbock A, Schmidt C, Van Aken H, et al; RenalRIPC Investigators. Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on kidney injury among high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;313(21):2133–2141. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.4189
  32. Li B, Lang X, Cao L, et al. Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on postoperative acute kidney injury among patients undergoing cardiac and vascular interventions: A meta-analysis. J Nephrol. 2017;30(1):19–33. doi:10.1007/s40620-016-0301-x
  33. Zhou C, Bulluck H, Fang N, Li L, Hausenloy DJ. Age and surgical complexity impact on renoprotection by remote ischemic preconditioning during adult cardiac surgery: A meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):215. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-00308-3
  34. Sardar P, Chatterjee S, Kundu A, et al. Remote ischemic preconditioning in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery: Evidence from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Cardiol. 2016;221:34–41. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.325
  35. Zarbock A, Kellum JA, Van Aken H, et al. Long-term effects of remote ischemic preconditioning on kidney function in high-risk cardiac surgery patients: Follow-up results from the RenalRIP Trial. Anesthesiology. 2017;126(5):787–798. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001598
  36. Walsh M, Whitlock R, Garg AX, et al; Remote IMPACT Investigators. Effects of remote ischemic preconditioning in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery (Remote IMPACT): A randomized controlled trial. CMAJ. 2016;188(5):329–336. doi:10.1503/cmaj.150632
  37. Pinaud F, Corbeau JJ, Baufreton C, et al. Remote ischemic preconditioning in aortic valve surgery: Results of a randomized controlled study. J Cardiol. 2016;67(1):36–41. doi:0.1016/j.jjcc.2015.06.007
  38. Hausenloy DJ, Candilio L, Laing C, et al; ERICCA Trial Investigators. Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (ERICCA): Rationale and study design of a multi-centre randomized double-blinded controlled clinical trial. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012;101(5):339–348.
  39. Meybohm P, Bein B, Brosteanu O, et al; RIPHeart Study Collaborators. A multicenter trial of remote ischemic preconditioning for heart surgery. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(15):1397–1407.
  40. Garratt KN, Whittaker P, Przyklenk K. Remote ischemic conditioning and the long road to clinical translation: Lessons learned from ERICCA and RIPHeart. Circ Res. 2016;118(7):1052–1054. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.308102
  41. Heusch G, Gersh BJ. ERICCA and RIPHeart: Two nails in the coffin for cardioprotection by remote ischemic conditioning? Probably not! Eur Heart J. 2016;37(2):200–202. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv606
  42. Przyklenk K. Efficacy of cardioprotective ‘conditioning’ strategies in aging and diabetic cohorts: The co-morbidity conundrum. Drugs Aging. 2011;28(5):331–343. doi:10.2165/11587190-000000000-00000
© Wroclaw Medical University