Table 1.
Study | n | Type of patients | RIC protocol | Main results | Type | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AIS | ||||||
Hougaard et al. (2014)11 | 274/196 | Patients with suspected AIS |
|
RIC was safe, feasible, and may reduce tissue risk of infarction in AIS patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis | Phase 3 | Completed |
England et al. (2017)23 | 13/13 | Patients with AIS of 24 h of ictus |
|
RIC was safe, feasible, and may improve neurological outcome in AIS patients | Not applicable | Completed |
Zhao et al. (2018)24 | 20 | Anterior circulation stroke patients treated with ET |
|
RIC was safe and feasible in AIS patients undergoing thrombectomy | Phase 1 | Completed |
RESCUE‐BRAIN | 100/100 | AIS patients within 6 h of ictus |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
RESIST | 2500 | Patients with acute stroke (including both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke) within 4 h of ictus |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
REMOTE‐CAT | 286/286 | AIS patients within 8 h of ictus |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
RECAST‐2 | 30/30 | AIS patients within 6 h of ictus |
|
No available | Phase 2 | Ongoing |
RICE PAC | 30/30 | Anterior circulation stroke patients treated with ET |
|
No available | Phase 1 | Ongoing |
REVISE‐2 | 90/90 | Anterior circulation stroke patients treated with ET |
|
No available | Phase 2 | Ongoing |
ICAS | ||||||
Li et al. (2015)30 | 34 | 10 patients with ICAS24 healthy volunteers |
|
RIC was safe and feasible in ICAS patients. | Not applicable | Completed |
Meng et al. (2012)12 | 51/52 | Symptomatic ICAS (age <80 years) |
|
RIC improved cerebral perfusion and reduced stroke recurrence | Phase 2 | Completed |
Meng et al. (2015)13 | 40/39 | Symptomatic ICAS (age 80–95 years) |
|
RIC safe and effective in inhibiting stroke recurrence | Phase 2 | Completed |
Hou et al. (2016)31 | 1500/1500 | Symptomatic ICAS (age <80 years) |
|
No available | Phase 3 | Ongoing |
EPIC‐sICAS | 50/50 | Symptomatic ICAS (age 18–45 years) |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
PICASSO | 5/5 | Symptomatic ICAS (age 30–90 years) |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
CAS and CEA | ||||||
Zhao et al. (2017)39 | 63/63/63 | Carotid artery stenosis patients undergoing CAS |
|
RIC reduced incidence of new brain lesion on MRI after CAS | Phase 2 | Completed |
Walsh et al. (2010)40 | 34/36 | Patients undergoing CEA |
|
RIC safe in patients undergoing CEA | Not applicable | Completed |
Garcia et al. (2016)41 | 30/19 | Patients undergoing CEA |
|
Unknown | Phase 2 | Completed |
Healy et al. (2015)42 | 24/21 | Patients undergoing CEA |
|
No reduction in stroke with RIC | Not applicable | Completed |
CSVD | ||||||
Mi et al. (2016)47 | 9/8 | Patients with CSVD |
|
RIC may benefit patients with CSVD | Phase 2 | Completed |
Wang et al. (2017)48 | 18/18 | Patients with CSVD‐related mild cognitive impairment |
|
RIC slowed cognition decline and reduced white matter hyperintensities | Phase 2 | Completed |
REM‐PROTECT | 40/20 | Patients with clinical lacunar stroke syndrome |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
ASAH | ||||||
Koch et al. (2011)51 | 26/7 | Patients with aSAH |
|
RIC safe and well tolerated | Phase 1b | Completed |
Gonzalez et al. (2014)52 | 20 | Patients with aSAH |
|
RIC safe and well tolerated | Phase 1 | Completed |
Laiwalla et al. (2016)53 | 21/61 | Patients with aSAH |
|
RIC improved functional outcome | Not applicable | Completed |
RIPC‐SAH | 50/50 | Patients with SAH |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
PreLIMBS | 30/30 | Patients with SAH within 2 weeks of initial bleeding |
|
No available | Not applicable | Ongoing |
RIC, remote ischemic conditioning; AIS, acute ischemic stroke; ICAS, intracranial atherosclerosis; CAS, carotid stenting; CEA, carotid endarterectomy; CSVD, cerebral small vessel disease; ET, endovascular thrombectomy; aSAH, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.