Open Access

Julia Ney, Katleen Hoffmann, Patrick Meybohm, Andreas Goetzenich, Sandra Kraemer, Carina Benstöm, Nina C. Weber, Johannes Bickenbach, Rolf Rossaint, Gernot Marx, Kai Zacharowski, Jürgen Bernhagen, Christian Stoppe

• In contrast to several smaller studies, which demonstrate that remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) reduces myocardial injury in patients that undergo cardiovascular surgery, the RIPHeart study failed to demonstrate beneficial effects of troponin release and clinical outcome in propofol-anesthetized cardiac surgery patients. Therefore, we addressed the potential biochemical mechanisms triggered by RIPC. This is a predefined prospective sub-analysis of the randomized and controlled RIPHeart study in cardiac surgery patients (n = 40) that was recently published. Blood samples were drawn from patients prior to surgery, after RIPC of four cycles of 5 min arm ischemia/5 min reperfusion (n = 19) and the sham (n = 21) procedure, after connection to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), at the end of surgery, 24 h postoperatively, and 48 h postoperatively for the measurement of troponin T, macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF), stromal cell-derived factor 1 (CXCL12), IL-6, CXCL8, and IL-10. After RIPC, right atrial tissue samples were taken for the measurement of extracellular-signal regulated kinase (ERK1/2), protein kinase B (AKT), Glycogen synthase kinase 3 (GSK-3β), protein kinase C (PKCε), and MIF content. RIPC did not significantly reduce the troponin release when compared with the sham procedure. MIF serum levels intraoperatively increased, peaking at intensive care unit (ICU) admission (with an increase of 48.04%, p = 0.164 in RIPC; and 69.64%, p = 0.023 over the baseline in the sham procedure), and decreased back to the baseline 24 h after surgery, with no differences between the groups. In the right atrial tissue, MIF content decreased after RIPC (1.040 ± 1.032 Arbitrary units [au] in RIPC vs. 2.028 ± 1.631 [au] in the sham procedure, p < 0.05). CXCL12 serum levels increased significantly over the baseline at the end of surgery, with no differences between the groups. ERK1/2, AKT, GSK-3β, and PKCɛ phosphorylation in the right atrial samples were no different between the groups. No difference was found in IL-6, CXCL8, and IL10 serum levels between the groups. In this cohort of cardiac surgery patients that received propofol anesthesia, we could not show a release of potential mediators of signaling, nor an effect on the inflammatory response, nor an activation of well-established protein kinases after RIPC. Based on these data, we cannot exclude that confounding factors, such as propofol, may have interfered with RIPC.