Invasiveness of previous treatment for peripheral arterial disease and risk of adverse cardiac events after coronary stenting

Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PADs), undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), have higher adverse event risks. The effect of invasiveness of PADs treatment on PCI outcome is unknown. This study assessed the impact of the invasiveness of previous PADs treatment (invasive or non-invasive) on event risks after PCI with contemporary drug-eluting stents. This post-hoc analysis pooled 3-year patient-level data of PCI all-comer patients living in the eastern Netherlands, previously treated for PADs. PADs included symptomatic atherosclerotic lesion in the lower or upper extremities; carotid or vertebral arteries; mesenteric arteries or aorta. Invasive PADs treatment comprised endarterectomy, bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, stenting or amputation; non-invasive treatment consisted of medication and participation in exercise programs. Primary endpoint was (coronary) target vessel failure: composite of cardiac mortality, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. Of 461 PCI patients with PADs, information on PADs treatment was available in 357 (77.4%) patients; 249 (69.7%) were treated invasively and 108 (30.3%) non-invasively. Baseline and PCI procedural characteristics showed no between-group difference. Invasiveness of PADs treatment was not associated with adverse event risks, including target vessel failure (20.5% vs. 16.0%; HR: 1.30, 95%-CI 0.75-2.26, p = 0.35), major adverse cardiac events (23.3% vs. 20.4%; HR: 1.16, 95%-CI 0.71-1.90, p = 0.55), and all-cause mortality (12.1% vs. 8.3%; HR: 1.48, 95%-CI 0.70-3.13, p = 0.30). In PADs patients participating in PCI trials, we found no significant relation between the invasiveness of previous PADs treatment and 3-year outcome after PCI. Consequently, high-risk PCI patients can be identified by consulting medical records, searching for PADs, irrespective of the invasiveness of PADs treatment.

[Cystic adventitial degeneration of the radial artery: wrist swelling of unexpected origin]

BACKGROUND Cystic adventitial degeneration (CAD) of an artery is a rare disease in which a mucinous cyst is formed in the adventitia. The condition usually occurs in the popliteal artery, but in rarer cases in arteries of the forearm, where it may lead to symptoms caused by local swelling or arterial occlusion. CASE DESCRIPTION A 54-year-old woman was referred by her general practitioner for a wrist swelling. This was initially thought to be caused by a ganglion but after ultrasound and MRI, it was found to be CAD of the radial artery. The symptoms recurred after transcutaneous aspiration of the cyst. This was followed by surgical resection with venous graft reconstruction. CONCLUSION In rare cases, swelling of the wrist is caused by CAD. Ultrasound and, if necessary, MRI will lead to a reliable diagnosis. Treatment consists of transcutaneous aspiration and, in case of recurrence, surgical resection.

The current state of surgical bypass versus drug eluting stents for long femoropopliteal occlusive lesions

Considerable advances have been made over the last decade in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Historically, endovascular treatment has been the accepted approach for short lesions and surgical bypass for long, complex femoropopliteal lesions. However, bypass surgery holds significant risk of mortality and morbidity for the patient. That toll includes prolonged hospitalization, as well as the potential for wound healing and systemic complications, all of which are intensified by the ageing population. Advances in endovascular devices, such as drug eluting stents present an alternative, minimally invasive treatment option which may more suitable for complex lesions in a high-risk population. The aim of this review is to discuss the current literature which addresses surgical bypass and drug eluting stents, particularly for the treatment of long, complex femoropopliteal disease.

Treating complex femoropopliteal lesions

Peripheral artery disease affects 202 million patients worldwide and may cause disabling intermittent claudication and critical limb ischemia. Next to life style changes, best medical treatment and supervised exercise therapy, it can be necessary to re-vascularize the limb. Treatment of femoropopliteal lesions poses a challenge and a surgical bypass remains recommended in the guidelines for longer and more complex lesions. Bypass surgery is associated with substantial morbidity and even mortality. Endovascular alternatives are quickly evolving from plain balloon angioplasty to drug-eluting stents, drug-coated balloons, polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents and atherectomy. These developments might challenge the gold standard in the near future. This article focuses on which technique can be used for which femoropopliteal lesion, particularly complex lesions, and summarizes the most recent and important literature on this topic.

Ischaemic preconditioning for the reduction of renal ischaemia reperfusion injury

BACKGROUND

Ischaemia reperfusion injury can lead to kidney dysfunction or failure. Ischaemic preconditioning is a short period of deprivation of blood supply to particular organs or tissue, followed by a period of reperfusion. It has the potential to protect kidneys from ischaemia reperfusion injury.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to look at the benefits and harms of local and remote ischaemic preconditioning to reduce ischaemia and reperfusion injury among people with renal ischaemia reperfusion injury.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 5 August 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials measuring kidney function and the role of ischaemic preconditioning in patients undergoing a surgical intervention that induces kidney injury. Kidney transplantation studies were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for eligibility and quality; data were extracted by two independent authors. We collected basic study characteristics: type of surgery, remote ischaemic preconditioning protocol, type of anaesthesia. We collected primary outcome measurements: serum creatinine and adverse effects to remote ischaemic preconditioning and secondary outcome measurements: acute kidney injury, need for dialysis, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, hospital stay and mortality. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 studies which randomised a total of 6851 patients. Risk of bias assessment indicated unclear to low risk of bias for most studies. For consistency regarding the direction of effects, continuous outcomes with negative values, and dichotomous outcomes with values less than one favour remote ischaemic preconditioning. Based on high quality evidence, remote ischaemic preconditioning made little or no difference to the reduction of serum creatinine levels at postoperative days one (14 studies, 1022 participants: MD -0.02 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02; I2 = 21%), two (9 studies, 770 participants: MD -0.04 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.02; I2 = 31%), and three (6 studies, 417 participants: MD -0.05 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10; I2 = 68%) compared to control.Serious adverse events occurred in four patients receiving remote ischaemic preconditioning by iliac clamping. It is uncertain whether remote ischaemic preconditioning by cuff inflation leads to increased adverse effects compared to control because the certainty of the evidence is low (15 studies, 3993 participants: RR 3.47, 95% CI 0.55 to 21.76; I2 = 0%); only two of 15 studies reported any adverse effects (6/1999 in the remote ischaemic preconditioning group and 1/1994 in the control group), the remaining 13 studies stated no adverse effects were observed in either group.Compared to control, remote ischaemic preconditioning made little or no difference to the need for dialysis (13 studies, 2417 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.94; I2 = 60%; moderate quality evidence), length of hospital stay (8 studies, 920 participants: MD 0.17 days, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.80; I2 = 49%, high quality evidence), or all-cause mortality (24 studies, 4931 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.37; I2 = 0%, high quality evidence).Remote ischaemic preconditioning may have slightly improved the incidence of acute kidney injury using either the AKIN (8 studies, 2364 participants: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.00; I2 = 61%, high quality evidence) or RIFLE criteria (3 studies, 1586 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.12; I2 = 0%, moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Remote ischaemic preconditioning by cuff inflation appears to be a safe method, and probably leads to little or no difference in serum creatinine, adverse effects, need for dialysis, length of hospital stay, death and in the incidence of acute kidney injury. Overall we had moderate-high certainty evidence however the available data does not confirm the efficacy of remote ischaemic preconditioning in reducing renal ischaemia reperfusion injury in patients undergoing major cardiac and vascular surgery in which renal ischaemia reperfusion injury may occur.

Preclinical Evidence for the Efficacy of Ischemic Postconditioning against Renal Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury, a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Renal ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) is a major cause of kidney damage after e.g. renal surgery and transplantation. Ischemic postconditioning (IPoC) is a promising treatment strategy for renal IRI, but early clinical trials have not yet replicated the promising results found in animal studies.

METHOD

We present a systematic review, quality assessment and meta-analysis of the preclinical evidence for renal IPoC, and identify factors which modify its efficacy.

RESULTS

We identified 39 publications studying >250 control animals undergoing renal IRI only and >290 animals undergoing renal IRI and IPoC. Healthy, male rats undergoing warm ischemia were used in the vast majority of studies. Four studies applied remote IPoC, all others used local IPoC. Meta-analysis showed that both local and remote IPoC ameliorated renal damage after IRI for the outcome measures serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen and renal histology. Subgroup analysis indicated that IPoC efficacy increased with the duration of index ischemia. Measures to reduce bias were insufficiently reported.

CONCLUSION

High efficacy of IPoC is observed in animal models, but factors pertaining to the internal and external validity of these studies may hamper the translation of IPoC to the clinical setting. The external validity of future animal studies should be increased by including females, comorbid animals, and transplantation models, in order to better inform clinical trial design. The severity of renal damage should be taken into account in the design and analysis of future clinical trials.

Remote ischemic preconditioning to reduce contrast-induced nephropathy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Despite the increasing use of pre- and posthydration protocols and low-osmolar instead of high-osmolar iodine-containing contrast media, the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is still significant. There is evidence that contrast media cause ischemia-reperfusion injury of the medulla. Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a non-invasive, safe, and low-cost method to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Methods

The RIPCIN study is a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial in which 76 patients at risk of CIN will receive standard hydration combined with RIPC or hydration with sham preconditioning. RIPC will be applied by four cycles of 5 min ischemia and 5 min reperfusion of the forearm by inflating a blood pressure cuff at 50 mmHg above the actual systolic pressure. The primary outcome measure will be the change in serum creatinine from baseline to 48 to 72 h after contrast administration.

Discussion

A recent pilot study reported that RIPC reduced the incidence of CIN after coronary angioplasty. The unusual high incidence of CIN in this study is of concern and limits its generalizability. Therefore, we propose a randomized controlled trial to study whether RIPC reduces contrast-induced kidney injury in patients at risk for CIN according to the Dutch guidelines.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76496973