Nair Ashok, Khan Sitara, Omar Sami, Pei Xiao-Qing, McNeill Karen, Chowienczyk Phil, Webb Andrew James
King's College London British Heart Foundation Centre, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, SE1 7EH, UK.
Biomedical Research Centre, Guy's & St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Jul;83(7):1416-1423. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13231. Epub 2017 Feb 14.
The aim of this article is to test the hypothesis that remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) increases circulating endogenous local and systemic plasma (nitrite) during RIPC and ischaemia-reperfusion (IR) as a potential protective mechanism against ischaemia-reperfusion injury (IRI).
Six healthy male volunteers (mean age 29.5 ± 7.6 years) were randomized in a crossover study to initially receive either RIPC (4 × 5 min cycles) to the left arm, or no RIPC (control), both followed by an ischaemia-reperfusion (IR) sequence (20 min cuff inflation to 200 mmHg, 20 min reperfusion) to the right arm. The volunteers returned at least 7 days later for the alternate intervention. The primary outcome was the effect of RIPC vs. control on local and systemic plasma (nitrite).
RIPC did not significantly change plasma (nitrite) in either the left or the right arm during the RIPC sequence. However, compared to control, RIPC decreased plasma (nitrite) during the subsequent IR sequence by ~26% (from 118 ± 9 to 87 ± 5 nmol l ) locally in the left arm (P = 0.008) overall, with an independent effect of -58.70 nmol l (95% confidence intervals -116.1 to -1.33) at 15 min reperfusion, and by ~24% (from 109 ± 9 to 83 ± 7 nmol l ) systemically in the right arm (P = 0.03).
RIPC had no effect on plasma (nitrite) during the RIPC sequence, but instead decreased plasma (nitrite) by ~25% during IR. This would likely counteract the protective mechanisms of RIPC, and contribute to RIPC's lack of efficacy, as observed in recent clinical trials. A combined approach of RIPC with nitrite administration may be required.
本文旨在验证以下假设,即远程缺血预处理(RIPC)在RIPC及缺血再灌注(IR)过程中会增加内源性局部和全身血浆(亚硝酸盐)水平,这是一种针对缺血再灌注损伤(IRI)的潜在保护机制。
在一项交叉研究中,6名健康男性志愿者(平均年龄29.5±7.6岁)被随机分组,最初分别接受对左臂进行的RIPC(4个5分钟周期)或不进行RIPC(对照),之后均对右臂进行缺血再灌注(IR)序列操作(袖带充气至200 mmHg持续20分钟,再灌注20分钟)。志愿者至少7天后返回接受另一种干预。主要结局是RIPC与对照对局部和全身血浆(亚硝酸盐)的影响。
在RIPC序列期间,RIPC对左臂或右臂的血浆(亚硝酸盐)均无显著影响。然而,与对照相比,RIPC在随后的IR序列期间使左臂局部血浆(亚硝酸盐)总体下降了约26%(从118±9降至87±5 nmol/l)(P = 0.008),在再灌注15分钟时独立效应为-58.70 nmol/l(95%置信区间-116.1至-1.33),右臂全身血浆(亚硝酸盐)下降了约24%(从109±9降至83±7 nmol/l)(P = 0.03)。
RIPC在RIPC序列期间对血浆(亚硝酸盐)无影响,但在IR期间反而使血浆(亚硝酸盐)下降了约25%。这可能会抵消RIPC的保护机制,并导致RIPC缺乏疗效,正如最近临床试验中所观察到的那样。可能需要将RIPC与亚硝酸盐给药联合应用。