Advertisement

Remote Ischemic Preconditioning and Endothelial Function in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Primary PCI

Published:February 24, 2014DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.02.012

      Abstract

      Background

      Remote ischemic preconditioning by transient limb ischemia reduces myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The aim of the study we report here was to assess the effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on endothelial function in patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

      Methods

      Forty-eight patients with acute myocardial infarction were enrolled. All participants were randomly divided into 2 groups. In Group I (n = 23), remote ischemic preconditioning was performed before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (intermittent arm ischemia-reperfusion through 4 cycles of 5-minute inflation and 5-minute deflation of a blood-pressure cuff to 200 mm Hg). In Group II (n = 25), standard percutaneous coronary intervention without preconditioning was performed. We assessed endothelial function using the flow-mediated dilation test on baseline, then within 1-3 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention, and again on days 2 and 7 after percutaneous coronary intervention.

      Results

      The brachial artery flow-mediated dilation results were significantly higher on the first day after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the preconditioning group (Group I) than in the control group (Group II) (12.1% vs 0.0%, P = .03, and 11.1% vs 6.3%, P = .016, respectively), and this difference remained on the seventh day (12.3% vs 7.4%, P = .0005, respectively).

      Conclusion

      We demonstrated for the first time that remote ischemic preconditioning before primary percutaneous coronary intervention significantly improves endothelial function in patients with acute myocardial infarction, and this effect remains constant for at least a week. We suppose that the improvement of endothelial function may be one of the possible explanations of the effect of remote ischemic preconditioning.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The American Journal of Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Brevoord D.
        • Kranke P.
        • Kuijpers M.
        • et al.
        Remote ischemic conditioning to protect against ischemia-reperfusion injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        PLoS One. 2012; 7: e42179
        • Bøtker H.E.
        • Kharbanda R.
        • Schmidt M.R.
        • et al.
        Remote ischemic conditioning before hospital admission, as a complement to angioplasty, and effect on myocardial salvage in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a randomized trial.
        Lancet. 2010; 375: 727-734
        • Luo S.J.
        • Zhou Y.J.
        • Shi D.M.
        • Ge H.L.
        • Wang J.L.
        • Liu R.F.
        Remote ischemic preconditioning reduces myocardial injury in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation.
        Can J Cardiol. 2013; 29: 1084-1089
        • Sloth A.D.
        • Schmidt M.R.
        • Munk K.
        • et al.
        Improved long-term clinical outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing remote ischaemic conditioning as an adjunct to primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
        Eur Heart J. 2014; 35: 168-175
        • Ahmed R.M.
        • Mohamed E.H.
        • Ashraf M.
        • et al.
        Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on serum troponin T level following elective percutaneous coronary intervention.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 82: E647-E653
        • Davies W.R.
        • Brown A.J.
        • Watson W.
        • et al.
        Remote ischemic preconditioning improves outcome at 6 years after elective percutaneous coronary intervention: the CRISP stent trial long-term follow-up.
        Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6: 246-251
        • Thijssen D.H.J.
        • Black M.A.
        • Pyke K.E.
        • et al.
        Assessment of flow-mediated dilation in humans: a methodological and physiological guideline.
        Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2011; 300: H2-H12
      1. Eeckhout E. Serruys P.W. Wijns W. Percutaneous interventional cardiovascular medicine. In: The PCR-EAPCI Textbook, Volume 1. PCR Publishing, Toulouse2012: 431-478
        • The T.I.M.I.
        Study Group. The thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) trial.
        N Engl J Med. 1985; 312: 932-936
        • Gibson C.M.
        • Cannon C.P.
        • Daley W.L.
        • et al.
        TIMI frame count. A quantitative method of assessing coronary artery flow.
        Circulation. 1996; 93: 879-888
        • Ji L.
        • Fu F.
        • Zhang L.
        • et al.
        Insulin attenuates myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury via reducing oxidative/nitrative stress.
        Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2010; 298: E871-E880
        • Higashi Y.
        • Maruhashi T.
        • Noma K.
        • et al.
        Oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction: clinical evidence and therapeutic implications.
        Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2014; 24: 165-169
        • Purdom-Dickinson S.E.
        • Sheveleva E.
        • Chen Q.M.
        • et al.
        Translational control of nrf2 protein in activation of antioxidant response by oxidants.
        Mol Pharmacol. 2007; 72: 1074-1081
        • Cattaneo M.G.
        • Cappellini E.
        • Ragni M.
        • et al.
        Chronic nitric oxide deprivation induces an adaptive antioxidant status in human endothelial cells.
        Cell Signal. 2013; 25: 2290-2297