Effect of the Remote Ischemic Postconditioning on the Prognosis of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke beyond Time Window: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The incidence of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remains high, and a timely restoration of cerebral blood flow is crucial for its prognosis. There are less therapeutic approaches to promote recovery of cerebral blood flow in AIS patients treated beyond a limited time window. The analysis of remote ischemic postconditioning (RIPostC) on the efficacy, complications and prognosis of AIS patients beyond the time window is of great significance. Objective To investigate the role of RIPostC on the prognosis of AIS beyond time window, thus providing a safe and effective cerebral blood flow restoration way for AIS beyond time window. Methods It was a randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial involving AIS patients beyond time window (onset time > 6 h) of thrombolysis who were hospitalized in the Department of Neurology, Beijing Aerospace General Hospital from September 2, 2021 to August 31, 2022. They were randomly assigned into the control group and experimental group, and treated and followed up for 90 days. General treatment and conventional treatment of cerebrovascular disease were performed in both groups. RIPostC and simulated RIPostC were respectively given 28 times within 14 days in the experimental group and control group, respectively. Before the intervention, and 30 days and 90 days after the intervention, neurological function was assessed using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Cognitive function was assessed by the Mini-mental Status Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Daily living ability was assessed by the Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL). Mental status was assessed by the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS). Cerebral blood flow velocity was assessed by the transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD). Inflammatory response was assessed by measuring interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels. Results Ninety-nine out of 122 AIS patients finally completed the trial and follow-up, including 49 patients in the experimental group and 50 in the control group. There were no significant differences in gender, age, underlying diseases (hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease) and baseline NIHSS scores between the two groups (P>0.05). Repeated measures analysis of variance showed that there was an interaction between time and group on MMSE, MoCA, mRS, NIHSS, cerebral blood flow velocity, and IL-6 (P<0.05). Specifically, the main effects of time and group on MMSE, MoCA, NIHSS, cerebral blood flow velocity, and IL-6 were significant (P<0.05), and the main effects of time on mRS, SAS, SDS, and IADL were significant (P<0.05). The MMSE and MoCA scores and cerebral blood flow velocity on 30 days and 90 days after the intervention were significantly higher in the experimental group than those of the control group, while the mRS and NIHSS scores were significantly lower (P<0.05). The SDS and IADL scores on 30, 90 days after the intervention were significantly lower than those of control group (P<0.05). On 30 days after the intervention, AIS patients in the experimental group had significantly higher SAS score and lower IL-6 level than those of control group (P<0.05). Adverse events were reported in 23 AIS patients, including 17 in the experimental group and 6 in the control group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of skin petechiae, dizziness, palpitation, chest tightness between the two groups (P>0.05). The incidence of skin ecchymosis [4.00% (2/50) vs. 12.24% (6/49) ] and the overall incidence of adverse events [12.00% (6/50) vs. 34.69% (17/49) ] in the control group were significantly lower than those of the experimental group (P<0.05) . Conclusion RIPostC can reduce the inflammatory response in AIS patients, and protect neurological function, cognitive function, depression and intracranial blood flow velocity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".