Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2012;7(2):e32296.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032296. Epub 2012 Feb 28.

Ischemic preconditioning in the animal kidney, a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kimberley E Wever  1 , Theo P Menting, Maroeska Rovers, J Adam van der Vliet, Gerard A Rongen, Rosalinde Masereeuw, Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga, Carlijn R Hooijmans, Michiel Warlé
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Ischemic preconditioning in the animal kidney, a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kimberley E Wever et al. PLoS One. 2012.

Abstract

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) is a potent renoprotective strategy which has not yet been translated successfully into clinical practice, in spite of promising results in animal studies. We performed a unique systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies to identify factors modifying IPC efficacy in renal ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI), in order to enhance the design of future (clinical) studies. An electronic literature search for animal studies on IPC in renal IRI yielded fifty-eight studies which met our inclusion criteria. We extracted data for serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen and histological renal damage, as well as study quality indicators. Meta-analysis showed that IPC reduces serum creatinine (SMD 1.54 [95%CI 1.16, 1.93]), blood urea nitrogen (SMD 1.42 [95% CI 0.97, 1.87]) and histological renal damage (SMD 1.12 [95% CI 0.89, 1.35]) after IRI as compared to controls. Factors influencing IPC efficacy were the window of protection (<24 h = early vs. ≥ 24 h = late) and animal species (rat vs. mouse). No difference in efficacy between local and remote IPC was observed. In conclusion, our findings show that IPC effectively reduces renal damage after IRI, with higher efficacy in the late window of protection. However, there is a large gap in study data concerning the optimal window of protection, and IPC efficacy may differ per animal species. Moreover, current clinical trials on RIPC may not be optimally designed, and our findings identify a need for further standardization of animal experiments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow chart of study selection.
The number of studies in each phase is indicated between brackets.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Quality assessment score, averaged per item.
Many studies scored poorly on key characteristics of scientific practice, and measures to avoid bias, such as characteristics of the subject population, randomization, blinding and exclusion criteria.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Effect of IPC on serum creatinine after renal IRI.
Left side favours control (renal IRI only), right side favours IPC. An overall beneficial effect of IPC on serum creatinine was observed (1.54 [1.16, 1.93]). Data presented as SMD and 95% CI.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Effect of IPC on BUN after renal IRI.
Left side favours control (renal IRI only), right side favours IPC. An overall beneficial effect of IPC on BUN was observed (1.42 [0.97, 1.87]). Data presented as SMD and 95% CI.
Figure 5
Figure 5. Effect of IPC on renal histology after renal IRI.
Left side favours control (renal IRI only), right side favours IPC. An overall beneficial effect of IPC on renal histology was observed (1.22 [0.89, 1.35]). Data presented as SMD and 95% CI.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Yin DP, Sankary HN, Chong AS, Ma LL, Shen J, et al. Protective effect of ischemic preconditioning on liver preservation-reperfusion injury in rats. Transplantation. 1998;66:152–157. - PubMed
    1. Hausenloy DJ, Yellon DM. Preconditioning and postconditioning: underlying mechanisms and clinical application. Atherosclerosis. 2009;204:334–341. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2008.10.029. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen X, Liu X, Wan X, Wu Y, Chen Y, et al. Ischemic preconditioning attenuates renal ischemia-reperfusion injury by inhibiting activation of IKKbeta and inflammatory response. Am J Nephrol. 2009;30:287–294. doi: 10.1159/000225928. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Murry CE, Jennings RB, Reimer KA. Preconditioning with ischemia: a delay of lethal cell injury in ischemic myocardium. Circulation. 1986;74:1124–1136. - PubMed
    1. Przyklenk K, Bauer B, Ovize M, Kloner RA, Whittaker P. Regional ischemic “preconditioning” protects remote virgin myocardium from subsequent sustained coronary occlusion. Circulation. 1993;87:893–899. - PubMed

Publication types