Effect of In-Hospital Remote Ischemic Perconditioning on Brain Infarction Growth and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: The RESCUE BRAIN Randomized Clinical Trial.
Journal
JAMA neurology
ISSN: 2168-6157
Titre abrégé: JAMA Neurol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589536
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2020
01 06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
1
4
2020
medline:
18
2
2021
entrez:
1
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. To determine whether treatment with remote ischemic perconditioning administered to the leg of patients with acute ischemic stroke can reduce brain infarction volume growth. 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). 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. 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. 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). 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. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02189928.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32227157
pii: 2763460
doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.0326
pmc: PMC7105950
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fibrinolytic Agents
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02189928']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
725-734Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 May;32(5):852-6
pubmed: 21454405
Stroke. 2013 Apr;44(4):1191-7
pubmed: 23339961
Stroke. 2013 Mar;44(3):870-947
pubmed: 23370205
JAMA. 2016 Sep 27;316(12):1279-88
pubmed: 27673305
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1009-18
pubmed: 25671797
Stroke. 2013 Sep;44(9):2628-39
pubmed: 23860298
Stroke. 2017 May;48(5):1412-1415
pubmed: 28265014
J Neurol Sci. 2012 May 15;316(1-2):99-103
pubmed: 22326365
Stroke. 2012 Dec;43(12):3238-44
pubmed: 23160876
Lancet. 2010 Feb 27;375(9716):727-34
pubmed: 20189026
Int J Stroke. 2016 Oct;11(8):938-943
pubmed: 27412192
N Engl J Med. 2008 Sep 25;359(13):1317-29
pubmed: 18815396
Brain Res. 2009 Sep 8;1288:88-94
pubmed: 19631625
Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2018 Nov 15;6(1):186-196
pubmed: 30656197
Stroke. 2009 Jun;40(6):2244-50
pubmed: 19246690
Stroke. 2017 Dec;48(12):3413-3419
pubmed: 29146878
Nat Rev Neurol. 2018 Jun;14(6):325-337
pubmed: 29674752
J Stroke. 2018 May;20(2):197-207
pubmed: 29886725
Stroke. 2006 Dec;37(12):2951-6
pubmed: 17082470
Exp Neurol. 2015 Oct;272:26-40
pubmed: 25900056
Stroke. 2009 Apr;40(4):1347-52
pubmed: 19228847
Blood Press. 1992 Aug;1(2):113-9
pubmed: 1366259
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):11-20
pubmed: 25517348
Transl Stroke Res. 2014 Aug;5(4):484-90
pubmed: 24385308
Stroke. 2011 Oct;42(10):2960-2
pubmed: 21836089
Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33(3):369-79
pubmed: 25868435
Stroke. 2012 Oct;43(10):2794-9
pubmed: 22910893
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
J Neurol Sci. 2014 Dec 15;347(1-2):205-9
pubmed: 25304056
Nat Rev Neurol. 2015 Dec;11(12):698-710
pubmed: 26585977
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 4;378(1):11-21
pubmed: 29129157
Stroke. 2015 Oct;46(10):3020-35
pubmed: 26123479
Brain. 2017 Aug 1;140(8):2079-2092
pubmed: 28641383
Brain Cogn. 2017 Apr;113:10-22
pubmed: 28088063
Stroke. 2007 Dec;38(12):3205-12
pubmed: 17975102
Int J Mol Sci. 2016 Nov 25;17(12):
pubmed: 27898007
Stat Med. 2009 Sep 10;28(20):2509-30
pubmed: 19610129
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2296-306
pubmed: 25882510
Lancet. 2019 Oct 19;394(10207):1415-1424
pubmed: 31500849
Stroke. 2012 Sep;43(9):2343-9
pubmed: 22700528
BMC Neurosci. 2015 Dec 29;16:97
pubmed: 26715469
Stroke. 2016 May;47(5):1389-98
pubmed: 27073243
Stroke. 2011 May;42(5):1387-91
pubmed: 21415404
Stroke. 2014 Jan;45(1):159-67
pubmed: 24203849