Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a promising neuroprotective therapy for ischemic stroke. Preclinical studies investigating RIC have shown RIC reduced infarct volume, but clinical trials have been equivocal. Therefore, the efficacy of RIC in reducing infarct volume and quality of current literature needs to be evaluated to identify knowledge gaps to support future clinical trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical literature involving RIC in rodent models of focal ischemia. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019145441). Eligibility criteria included rat or mice models of focal ischemia that received RIC to a limb either before, during, or after stroke. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from 1946 to August 2019. Risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE risk of bias tool along with construct validity. Seventytwo studies were included in the systematic review. RIC was shown to reduce infarct volume (SMD − 2.19; CI − 2.48 to − 1.91) when compared to stroke-only controls and no adverse events were reported with regard to RIC. Remote ischemic conditioning was shown to be most efficacious in males (SMD − 2.26; CI − 2.58 to − 1.94) and when delivered poststroke (SMD − 1.34; CI − 1.95 to − 0.73). A high risk of bias was present; thus, measures of efficacy may be exaggerated. A limitation is the poor methodological reporting of many studies, resulting in unclear construct validity. We identified several important, but under investigated topics including the efficacy of RIC in different stroke models, varied infarct sizes and location, and potential sex differences.

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a noninvasive procedure whereby several periods of ischemia are induced in a limb. Although there is growing interest in using RIC to improve stroke recovery, preclinical RIC research has focused exclusively on neuroprotection, using male animals and the intraluminal suture stroke model, and delivered RIC at times not relevant to either brain repair or behavioral recovery. In alignment with the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable, we address these shortcomings. First, a standardized session (5-minute inflation/deflation, 4 repetitions) of RIC was delivered using a cuff on the contralesional hindlimb in both male and female Sprague-Dawley rats. Using the endothelin-1 stroke model, RIC was delivered once either prestroke (18 hours before, pre-RIC) or poststroke (4 hours after, post-RIC), and infarct volume was assessed at 24 hours poststroke using magnetic resonance imaging. RIC was delivered at these times to mimic the day before a surgery where clots are possible or as a treatment similar to tissue plasminogen activator, respectively. Pre-RIC reduced infarct volume by 41% compared with 29% with post-RIC. RIC was neuroprotective in both sexes, but males had a 46% reduction of infarct volume compared with 23% in females. After confirming the acute efficacy of RIC, we applied it chronically for 4 weeks, beginning 5 days poststroke. This delayed RIC failed to enhance poststroke behavioral recovery. Based on these findings, the most promising application of RIC is during the hyperacute and early acute phases of stroke, a time when other interventions such as exercise may be contraindicated.

No abstract

No abstract