BMC Anesthesiology (May 2024)

Remote ischemic conditioning may improve graft function following kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

  • Yang Zhang,
  • Yuqin Long,
  • Yongjun Li,
  • Dawei Liao,
  • Linkun Hu,
  • Ke Peng,
  • Hong Liu,
  • Fuhai Ji,
  • Xisheng Shan

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-024-02549-y
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has the potential to benefit graft function following kidney transplantation by reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury; however, the current clinical evidence is inconclusive. This meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) aimed to determine whether RIC improves graft function after kidney transplantation. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases until June 20, 2023, to identify all randomized controlled trials that examined the impact of RIC on graft function after kidney transplantation. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) post-kidney transplantation. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of acute rejection, graft loss, 3- and 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR), and the length of hospital stay. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on RIC procedures (preconditioning, perconditioning, or postconditioning), implementation sites (upper or lower extremity), and graft source (living or deceased donor). Results Our meta-analysis included eight trials involving 1038 patients. Compared with the control, RIC did not significantly reduce the incidence of DGF (8.8% vs. 15.3%; risk ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48–1.21, P = 0.25, I 2 = 16%), and TSA results showed that the required information size was not reached. However, the RIC group had a significantly increased eGFR at 3 months after transplantation (mean difference = 2.74 ml/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI: 1.44–4.05 ml/min/1.73 m2, P < 0.0001, I 2 = 0%), with a sufficient evidence suggested by TSA. The secondary outcomes were comparable between the other secondary outcomes. The treatment effect of RIC did not differ between the subgroup analyses. Conclusion In this meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis, RIC did not lead to a significant reduction in the incidence of DGF after kidney transplantation. Nonetheless, RIC demonstrated a positive correlation with 3-month eGFR. Given the limited number of patients included in this study, well-designed clinical trials with large sample sizes are required to validate the renoprotective benefits of RIC. Trial registration This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Number CRD42023464447).

Keywords