The Infarct-Limiting Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Rats Is Not Affected by Aspirin.

PURPOSE: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has been shown to be a powerful cardioprotective therapy in animal models. However, a protective effect in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction has failed to be confirmed. A recent pre-clinical study reported that aspirin which is routinely given to patients undergoing reperfusion therapy blocked the infarct-limiting effect of ischemic postconditioning. The present study was designed to test whether aspirin could also be blocking the infarct-limiting effect of RIC. METHODS: This was investigated in vivo using male Sprague Dawley rats (n = 5 to 6 per group) subjected to either 30 min of regional myocardial ischemia, followed by 120-min reperfusion, or additionally to a RIC protocol initiated after 20-min myocardial ischemia. The RIC protocol included four cycles of 5-min hind limb ischemia interspersed with 5-min reperfusion. Intravenous aspirin (30 mg/kg) or vehicle (saline) was administered after 15-min myocardial ischemia. RESULTS: RIC significantly reduced infarct size (IS) normalized to the area at risk, by 47%. Aspirin administration did not affect IS nor did it attenuate the infarct-limiting effect of RIC. CONCLUSION: Aspirin administration in the setting of myocardial infarction is not likely to interfere with the cardioprotective effect of RIC.

Remote ischaemic conditioning: defining critical criteria for success-report from the 11th Hatter Cardiovascular Workshop.

The Hatter Cardiovascular Institute biennial workshop, originally scheduled for April 2020 but postponed for 2 years due to the Covid pandemic, was organised to debate and discuss the future of Remote Ischaemic Conditioning (RIC). This evolved from the large multicentre CONDI-2-ERIC-PPCI outcome study which demonstrated no additional benefit when using RIC in the setting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The workshop discussed how conditioning has led to a significant and fundamental understanding of the mechanisms preventing cell death following ischaemia and reperfusion, and the key target cyto-protective pathways recruited by protective interventions, such as RIC. However, the obvious need to translate this protection to the clinical setting has not materialised largely due to the disconnect between preclinical and clinical studies. Discussion points included how to adapt preclinical animal studies to mirror the patient presenting with an acute myocardial infarction, as well as how to refine patient selection in clinical studies to account for co-morbidities and ongoing therapy. These latter scenarios can modify cytoprotective signalling and need to be taken into account to allow for a more robust outcome when powered appropriately. The workshop also discussed the potential for RIC in other disease settings including ischaemic stroke, cardio-oncology and COVID-19. The workshop, therefore, put forward specific classifications which could help identify so-called responders vs. non-responders in both the preclinical and clinical settings.

Targeting myocardial ischaemic injury in the absence of reperfusion.

Sudden myocardial ischaemia causes an acute coronary syndrome. In the case of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), this is usually caused by the acute rupture of atherosclerotic plaque and obstruction of a coronary artery. Timely restoration of blood flow can reduce infarct size, but ischaemic regions of myocardium remain in up to two-thirds of patients due to microvascular obstruction (MVO). Experimentally, cardioprotective strategies can limit infarct size, but these are primarily intended to target reperfusion injury. Here, we address the question of whether it is possible to specifically prevent ischaemic injury, for example in models of chronic coronary artery occlusion. Two main types of intervention are identified: those that preserve ATP levels by reducing myocardial oxygen consumption, (e.g. hypothermia; cardiac unloading; a reduction in heart rate or contractility; or ischaemic preconditioning), and those that increase myocardial oxygen/blood supply (e.g. collateral vessel dilation). An important consideration in these studies is the method used to assess infarct size, which is not straightforward in the absence of reperfusion. After several hours, most of the ischaemic area is likely to become infarcted, unless it is supplied by pre-formed collateral vessels. Therefore, therapies that stimulate the formation of new collaterals can potentially limit injury during subsequent exposure to ischaemia. After a prolonged period of ischaemia, the heart undergoes a remodelling process. Interventions, such as those targeting inflammation, may prevent adverse remodelling. Finally, harnessing of the endogenous process of myocardial regeneration has the potential to restore cardiomyocytes lost during infarction.

[Neuroprotective and nephroprotective effects of remote postconditioning: Prospects for clinical use]. / Neiroprotektornyi i nefroprotektornyi éffekty distantnogo prekonditsionirovaniia. Perspektivy klinicheskogo primeneniia.

The results of experimental and clinical studies strongly suggest that remote ischemic preconditioning (RIP) has no neuroprotective effect during cardiac surgery performed under extracorporeal circulation. Remote preconditioning (RP) has no neuroprotective effect in hemorrhagic stroke. A randomized multicenter study is needed to evaluate the efficiency RIP in patients with ischemic stroke. RP reduces the severity of ischemia/reperfusion kidney injury during transplantation. RIP has been established to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy. There is a need for a multicenter trial to evaluate the efficiency of RIP in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Analysis of the presented data indicates that RIP fails to prevent cardiorenal syndrome in infants and children during cardiac surgery. The data available in the literature on the capacity of RIP to provide nephroprotective effect in patients after coronary artery bypass surgery are discordant and indicative of the advisability of a multicenter study.

[Remote preconditioning phenomenon. prospects for use in pathology of lung and gastrointestinal tract].

The literature data on the effectiveness of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIP) in the prevention of lung injury are contradictory. Authors of some works argue that RIP prevents lung damage during surgical interventions, the authors of other publications claim that the RIP does not protect lung against pathological processes. It is obvious that there is an urgent need for multicenter, randomized trials aimed at studying RIP protective effects against pathological processes in lung. Also required is clinical evaluation of the effectiveness of RIP in the thromboembolism of pulmonary arteries, the transplantation of the lungs and intestinal infarction. Remote preconditioning prevents the intestine injury associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Experimental data indicate that RIP has the hepatoprotective effect during ischemia and reperfusion injury of liver, septic or haemorrhagic shock. The question of whether the DIP has a protective effect during ischemia-reperfusion of the pancreas remains open.