Remote ischemic preconditioning versus sham-control for prevention of anastomotic leakage after resection for rectal cancer (RIPAL trial): a pilot randomized controlled, triple-blinded monocenter trial.
Anastomotic leakage
Ischemia‒reperfusion injury
Rectal cancer
Rectal resection
Remote ischemic preconditioning
Journal
International journal of colorectal disease
ISSN: 1432-1262
Titre abrégé: Int J Colorectal Dis
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8607899
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 May 2024
03 May 2024
Historique:
accepted:
25
04
2024
medline:
3
5
2024
pubmed:
3
5
2024
entrez:
3
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) reportedly reduces ischemia‒reperfusion injury (IRI) in various organ systems. In addition to tension and technical factors, ischemia is a common cause of anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal resection. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the potentially protective effect of RIPC on anastomotic healing and to determine the effect size to facilitate the development of a subsequent confirmatory trial. Fifty-four patients with rectal cancer (RC) who underwent anterior resection were enrolled in this prospectively registered (DRKS0001894) pilot randomized controlled triple-blinded monocenter trial at the Department of Surgery, University Medicine Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany, between 10/12/2019 and 19/06/2022. The primary endpoint was AL within 30 days after surgery. The secondary endpoints were perioperative morbidity and mortality, reintervention, hospital stay, readmission and biomarkers of ischemia‒reperfusion injury (vascular endothelial growth factor, VEGF) and cell death (high mobility group box 1 protein, HMGB1). RIPC was induced through three 10-min cycles of alternating ischemia and reperfusion to the upper extremity. Of the 207 patients assessed, 153 were excluded, leaving 54 patients to be randomized to the RIPC or the sham-RIPC arm (27 each per arm). The mean age was 61 years, and the majority of patients were male (37:17 (68.5:31.5%)). Most of the patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant therapy (29/54 (53.7%)) for adenocarcinoma (52/54 (96.3%)). The primary endpoint, AL, occurred almost equally frequently in both arms (RIPC arm: 4/25 (16%), sham arm: 4/26 (15.4%), p = 1.000). The secondary outcomes were comparable except for a greater rate of reintervention in the sham arm (9 (6-12) vs. 3 (1-5), p = 0.034). The median duration of endoscopic vacuum therapy was shorter in the RIPC arm (10.5 (10-11) vs. 38 (24-39) days, p = 0.083), although the difference was not statistically significant. A clinically relevant protective effect of RIPC on anastomotic healing after rectal resection cannot be assumed on the basis of these data.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38700747
doi: 10.1007/s00384-024-04637-4
pii: 10.1007/s00384-024-04637-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
65Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2022) Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72:7–33
doi: 10.3322/caac.21708
pubmed: 35020204
Borstlap WAA, Westerduin E, Aukema TS, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ, Dutch Snapshot Research Group (2017) Anastomotic leakage and chronic presacral sinus formation after low anterior resection: results from a large cross-sectional study. Ann Surg 266:870–877
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002429
pubmed: 28746154
Hardt J, Pilz L, Magdeburg J, Kienle P, Post S, Magdeburg R (2017) Preoperative hypoalbuminemia is an independent risk factor for increased high-grade morbidity after elective rectal cancer resection. Int J Colorectal Dis 32:1439–1446
doi: 10.1007/s00384-017-2884-7
pubmed: 28823064
Branagan G, Finnis D, Wessex Colorectal Cancer Audit Working Group (2005) Prognosis after anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1021–1026
doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-0869-4
pubmed: 15789125
Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P (2011) Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 253:890–899
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182128929
pubmed: 21394013
Kverneng Hultberg D, Svensson J, Jutesten H, Rutegård J, Matthiessen P, Lydrup M-L et al (2020) The impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term function after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 63:619–628
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001613
pubmed: 32032197
Oberkofler CE, Limani P, Jang J-H, Rickenbacher A, Lehmann K, Raptis DA et al (2014) Systemic protection through remote ischemic preconditioning is spread by platelet-dependent signaling in mice. Hepatology 60:1409–1417
doi: 10.1002/hep.27089
pubmed: 24700614
Ali ZA, Callaghan CJ, Lim E, Ali AA, Nouraei SAR, Akthar AM et al (2007) Remote ischemic preconditioning reduces myocardial and renal injury after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a randomized controlled trial. Circulation 116(11 Suppl):I98–105
pubmed: 17846333
Zarbock A, Schmidt C, Van Aken H, Wempe C, Martens S, Zahn PK et al (2015) Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on kidney injury among high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 313:2133–2141
doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.4189
pubmed: 26024502
Hummitzsch L, Zitta K, Berndt R, Wong YL, Rusch R, Hess K et al (2019) Remote ischemic preconditioning attenuates intestinal mucosal damage: insight from a rat model of ischemia-reperfusion injury. J Transl Med 17:136
doi: 10.1186/s12967-019-1885-4
pubmed: 31036020
pmcid: 6489261
Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 63:e1–37
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004
pubmed: 20346624
Rahbari NN, Weitz J, Hohenberger W, Heald RJ, Moran B, Ulrich A et al (2010) Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the international study group of rectal cancer. Surgery 147:339–351
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.012
pubmed: 20004450
Denost Q, Rouanet P, Faucheron J-L, Panis Y, Meunier B, Cotte E et al (2017) To drain or not to drain infraperitoneal anastomosis after rectal excision for cancer: the GRECCAR 5 randomized trial. Ann Surg 265:474–480
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001991
pubmed: 27631776
Holzner PA, Kulemann B, Kuesters S, Timme S, Hoeppner J, Hopt UT et al (2011) Impact of remote ischemic preconditioning on wound healing in small bowel anastomoses. World J Gastroenterol 17:1308–1316
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i10.1308
pubmed: 21455330
pmcid: 3068266
Li C, Li Y-S, Xu M, Wen S-H, Yao X, Wu Y et al (2013) Limb remote ischemic preconditioning for intestinal and pulmonary protection during elective open infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology 118:842–852
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182850da5
pubmed: 23353795
Struck R, Wittmann M, Müller S, Meybohm P, Müller A, Bagci S (2018) Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on intestinal ischemia-reperfusion injury in adults undergoing on-pump CABG surgery: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 32:1243–1247
doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2017.07.027
pubmed: 29429928
Yang X, Tian C, Gao Y, Yang L, Wu Y, Zhang N (2023) Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Gastroenterol 58(6):634–642
doi: 10.1080/00365521.2022.2153344
pubmed: 36469647
Limani P, Linecker M, Oberkofler CE, Barmettler G, Kaech A, Graf R et al (2016) Remote ischemic preconditioning: a novel strategy in rescuing older livers from ischemia-reperfusion injury in a rodent model. Ann Surg 264:797–803
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001765
pubmed: 27584570
Koh WU, Kim J, Lee J, Song G-W, Hwang GS, Tak E et al (2019) Remote ischemic preconditioning and diazoxide protect from hepatic ischemic reperfusion injury by inhibiting HMGB1-induced TLR4/MyD88/NF-κB signaling. Int J Mol Sci 20:E5899
doi: 10.3390/ijms20235899
Hausenloy DJ, Kharbanda RK, Møller UK, Ramlall M, Aarøe J, Butler R et al (2019) Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet 394:1415–1424
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32039-2
pubmed: 31500849
pmcid: 6891239
Ney J, Hoffmann K, Meybohm P, Goetzenich A, Kraemer S, Benstöm C et al (2018) Remote ischemic preconditioning does not affect the release of humoral factors in propofol-anesthetized cardiac surgery patients: a secondary analysis of the RIPHeart study. Int J Mol Sci 19:E1094
doi: 10.3390/ijms19041094