Ischemic preconditioning in myocardial revascularization with intermittent aortic cross-clamping

Time to Give Up on Cardioprotection?

The mortality from acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains significant, and the prevalence of post-myocardial infarction heart failure is increasing. Therefore, cardioprotection beyond timely reperfusion is needed. Conditioning procedures are the most powerful cardioprotective interventions in animal experiments. However, ischemic preconditioning cannot be used to reduce infarct size in patients with AMI because its occurrence is not predictable; several studies in patients undergoing surgical coronary revascularization report reduced release of creatine kinase and troponin. Ischemic postconditioning reduces infarct size in most, but not all, studies in patients undergoing interventional reperfusion of AMI, but may require direct stenting and exclusion of patients with >6 hours of symptom onset to protect. Remote ischemic conditioning reduces infarct size in patients undergoing interventional reperfusion of AMI, elective percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization, and other cardiovascular surgery in many, but not in all, studies. Adequate dose-finding phase II studies do not exist. There are only 2 phase III trials, both on remote ischemic conditioning in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery, both with neutral results in terms of infarct size and clinical outcome, but also both with major problems in trial design. We discuss the difficulties in translation of cardioprotection from animal experiments and proof-of-concept trials to clinical practice. Given that most studies on ischemic postconditioning and all studies on remote ischemic preconditioning in patients with AMI reported reduced infarct size, it would be premature to give up on cardioprotection.

Interaction of risk factors, comorbidities, and comedications with ischemia/reperfusion injury and cardioprotection by preconditioning, postconditioning, and remote conditioning

Pre-, post-, and remote conditioning of the myocardium are well described adaptive responses that markedly enhance the ability of the heart to withstand a prolonged ischemia/reperfusion insult and provide therapeutic paradigms for cardioprotection. Nevertheless, more than 25 years after the discovery of ischemic preconditioning, we still do not have established cardioprotective drugs on the market. Most experimental studies on cardioprotection are still undertaken in animal models, in which ischemia/reperfusion is imposed in the absence of cardiovascular risk factors. However, ischemic heart disease in humans is a complex disorder caused by, or associated with, cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, insulin resistance, heart failure, altered coronary circulation, and aging. These risk factors induce fundamental alterations in cellular signaling cascades that affect the development of ischemia/reperfusion injury per se and responses to cardioprotective interventions. Moreover, some of the medications used to treat these risk factors, including statins, nitrates, and antidiabetic drugs, may impact cardioprotection by modifying cellular signaling. The aim of this article is to review the recent evidence that cardiovascular risk factors and their medication may modify the response to cardioprotective interventions. We emphasize the critical need to take into account the presence of cardiovascular risk factors and concomitant medications when designing preclinical studies for the identification and validation of cardioprotective drug targets and clinical studies. This will hopefully maximize the success rate of developing rational approaches to effective cardioprotective therapies for the majority of patients with multiple risk factors.

What is Wrong With Cardiac Conditioning? We May be Shooting at Moving Targets

Early recanalization of the occluded culprit coronary artery clearly reduces infarct size in both animal models and patients and improves clinical outcomes. Unfortunately, reperfusion can seldom be accomplished before some myocardium infarcts. As a result there has been an intensive search for interventions that will make the heart resistant to infarction so that reperfusion could salvage more myocardium. A number of interventions have been identified in animal models, foremost being ischemic preconditioning. It protects by activating signaling pathways that prevent lethal permeability transition pores from forming in the heart’s mitochondria at reperfusion. Such conditioning can be accomplished in a clinically relevant manner either by staccato reperfusion (ischemic postconditioning) or by pharmacological activation of the conditioning signaling pathways prior to reperfusion. Unfortunately, clinical trials of ischemic postconditioning and pharmacologic conditioning have been largely disappointing. We suggest that this may be caused by inappropriate use as models intended to mimic the clinical scenario of young healthy animals that receive none of the many drugs currently given to our patients. Patients may be resistant to some forms of conditioning because of comorbidities, for example, diabetes, or they may already be conditioned by adjunct medications, for example, P2Y12 inhibitors or opioids. Incremental technological improvements in patient care may render some approaches to cardioprotection redundant, and thus the clinical target may be continually changing, while our animal models have not kept pace. In remote conditioning, a limb is subjected to ischemia/reperfusion prior to or during coronary reperfusion. Its mechanism is not as well understood as that of ischemic preconditioning, but the results have been very encouraging. In the present article, we will review ischemic, remote, and pharmacologic conditioning and possible confounders that could interfere with their efficacy in clinical trials in 2 settings of myocardial ischemia: (1) primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction and (2) elective angioplasty.

Early stage effect of ischemic preconditioning for patients undergoing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafts surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: During the on-pump coronary artery bypass grafts surgery, ischemia/reperfusion injury would happen. Ischemia preconditioning could increase the tolerance against subsequent ischemia and reduce the ischemia/reperfusion injury. However the clinical outcomes of the available trials were different.

Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2013), the Medline/PubMed and CNKI in March 2013. RevMan 5.1.6 and GRADEprofiler 3.6 were used for statistical analysis and evidence quality assessment. Heterogeneity was evaluated with significance set at P≤0.10.

Results: Eighteen randomized controlled trials were included. There were no differences on in-hospital mortality, postoperative myocardial infarction morbidity between ischemia preconditioning and control groups. The heterogeneity of creatine kinase-MB level 24 hours after surgery was obvious. The differences of 72 hours area under the curve of cardiac troponin T (mean differences of -14.50, 95% confidence interval of -21.71 to -7.28) and troponin I (mean differences -181.79, 95% confidence interval of -270.07 to -93.52) after surgery were observed.

Conclusions: All the 18 trails, the positive and the negative results were equal. The meta-analysis results should be interpreted with caution due to limited effective data. Because of high cost-effectiveness, ischemia preconditioning could not be denied completely. Large-scale randomized studies are needed, with the operation procedures and included criteria being more specific.

Ischemia-reperfusion histopathology alterations of the rabbit intestinal wall with and without ischemic preconditioning

PURPOSE: To evaluate the histopathology alterations of the intestinal mucosa of rabbits submitted to mesenteric artery ischemia and reperfusion with and without ischemic preconditioning. METHODS: Two groups of ten male New Zealand white rabbits body (weight 2.2-3.0, average 2.5 kg). For mesenteric ischemia induction in all animals the small bowel and mesentery were cut 30cm and 60cm far from the gastroduodenal pyloric transition before the proximal mesenteric artery occlusion. In the Group 1 animals, the proximal mesenteric artery was occluded for 45 min with an atraumatic vascular clamp, followed by reperfusion for 30 min. In the Group 2 the 45 min ischemic phase was preceded by three cycles of ischemia (2 minutes each) alternated with three cycles of reperfusion (2 minutes each). For istopathology study small bowel biopsies were obtained before ischemia (control), after 45 min of mesenteric ischemia and at 30 min. of mesenteric artery reperfusion. RESULTS: In the Group I animals, the followings histopathology grade results were observed: t1, mean 2,8; t2, mean 3,3. Using the Kruskal-Wallis non-parameter test, differences between t0 and t1 and t0 and t2 were significants (p<0.05), but not significant between t1 and t2 (p>0.05). In the Group 2 animals histopathology grade results were: t1 mean 2,6 and t2, mean 2,1. Differences between t0 and t1, t0 and t2 were significant (p<0.05). It was not observed differences (p>0.05) between results of t1 in both groups but histopathology injury observed in Group 1 t2 biopsies were higher (p<0.05) than observed in the same period (t2) of Group 2 animals. CONCLUSION: Microscopic examination of the biopsies revealed significant evidence of preconditioning protection against small bowel wall ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Clinical cardioprotection and the value of conditioning responses

Adjunctive cardioprotective strategies for ameliorating the reversible and irreversible injuries with ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) are highly desirable. However, after decades of research, the promise of clinical cardioprotection from I/R injury remains poorly realized. This may arise from the challenges of trialing and effectively translating experimental findings from laboratory models to patients. One can additionally consider whether features of the more heavily focused upon candidates could limit or preclude therapeutic utility and thus whether we might shift attention to alternate strategies. The phenomena of preconditioning and postconditioning have proven fertile in identification of experimental means of cardioprotection and are the most intensely interrogated responses in the field. However, there is evidence these processes, which share common molecular signaling elements and end effectors, may be poor choices for clinical exploitation. This includes evidence of age dependence, limiting efficacy in target aged or senescent hearts; refractoriness to conditioning stimuli in diseased myocardium; interference from a variety of relevant pharmaceuticals; inadvertent induction of these responses by prior ischemia or commonly used drugs, precluding further benefit; and sex dependence of protective signaling. This review focuses on these features, raising questions about current research strategies, and the suitability of these widely studied phenomena as rational candidates for clinical translation.