Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning on Outcomes for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Undergoing Alteplase Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a simple, noninvasive intervention hypothesized to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Its role as an adjunct to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing RIC in AIS patients treated exclusively with IVT. Major databases were searched through February 2025 (PROSPERO: CRD420251144277). The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane tool, and evidence certainty was assessed with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Trial sequential analysis was also performed. Six randomized controlled trials (n = 955; RIC = 502, control = 453) met eligibility. Safety outcomes were comparable between groups, with no significant differences in stroke recurrence [risk ratio (RR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-1.48], hemorrhagic transformation (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.67-2.31), or 90-day mortality (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.46-3.07). RIC did not significantly improve excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-1 at 90 days: RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.95-1.20) or functional independence (modified Rankin Scale 0-2: RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.89-1.03). Barthel Index scores showed a nonsignificant trend toward benefit (mean difference = 2.77; 95% CI, -1.51-7.06), and National Institutes of Health Stroke scores at 24 hours, 7 days, 30 days, and follow-up were unchanged. Trial sequential analysis showed the required information size was not reached, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation certainty was low to very low. RIC is safe but has not yet been shown to significantly improve functional or neurological outcomes in AIS patients treated with IVT. Future trials should assess RIC in patients receiving different types of thrombolysis (alteplase vs tenecteplase).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cardiology in Review
Published
2026-02-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/crd.0000000000001192
Primary Topic
Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning on Outcomes for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Undergoing Alteplase Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis

Maria Khan, Mosaad Morshed, Nara Miriam Michaelson, Yousif Hameed Kurmasha et al.
Cardiology in Review
Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
article

Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning on Outcomes for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Undergoing Alteplase Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis

Maria Khan, Mosaad Morshed, Nara Miriam Michaelson, Yousif Hameed Kurmasha, Abdulrahman Raad Abdulkareem Al-waeli, Mohammedsadeq A. Shweliya, Abubaker Alghazal, Ali Saad Al-Shammari, Yasar Sattar, Zahraa Ali Hamzah, Khadeeja Ali Hamzah, Mohammed Grmasha, Abdullah Muataz Taha Al-Ibraheem
article en

Abstract

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a simple, noninvasive intervention hypothesized to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Its role as an adjunct to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing RIC in AIS patients treated exclusively with IVT. Major databases were searched through February 2025 (PROSPERO: CRD420251144277). The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane tool, and evidence certainty was assessed with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Trial sequential analysis was also performed. Six randomized controlled trials (n = 955; RIC = 502, control = 453) met eligibility. Safety outcomes were comparable between groups, with no significant differences in stroke recurrence [risk ratio (RR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-1.48], hemorrhagic transformation (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.67-2.31), or 90-day mortality (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.46-3.07). RIC did not significantly improve excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-1 at 90 days: RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.95-1.20) or functional independence (modified Rankin Scale 0-2: RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.89-1.03). Barthel Index scores showed a nonsignificant trend toward benefit (mean difference = 2.77; 95% CI, -1.51-7.06), and National Institutes of Health Stroke scores at 24 hours, 7 days, 30 days, and follow-up were unchanged. Trial sequential analysis showed the required information size was not reached, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation certainty was low to very low. RIC is safe but has not yet been shown to significantly improve functional or neurological outcomes in AIS patients treated with IVT. Future trials should assess RIC in patients receiving different types of thrombolysis (alteplase vs tenecteplase).

Cardiology in Review
University of Baghdad (IQ), Harvard University (US), Mansoura University (EG), Liaquat National Hospital (PK), Baghdad Medical City (IQ), University of Benghazi (LY), Society of Interventional Radiology (US), University of Kufa (IQ), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.