Search

Hypoxia is a central pathophysiological component in cancer, myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke, which represent the most common medical conditions resulting in long-term disability and death. Recent evidence suggests common signaling pathways in these diverse settings mediated by non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), which are packaged in extracellular vesicles (EVs) protecting ncRNAs from degradation. EVs are a heterogeneous group of lipid bilayer-covered vesicles released from virtually all cells, which have important roles in intercellular communication. Recent studies pointed out that ncRNAs including long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) and microRNAs (miRNAs) are selectively sorted into EVs, modulating specific aspects of cancer development, namely cell proliferation, migration, invasion, angiogenesis, immune tolerance or drug resistance, under conditions of hypoxia in recipient cells. In myocardial infarction and stroke, ncRNAs shuttled via EVs have been shown to control tissue survival and remodeling post-hypoxia by regulating cell injury, inflammatory responses, angiogenesis, neurogenesis or neuronal plasticity. This review discusses recent evidence on EV-associated ncRNAs in hypoxic cancer, myocardial infarction and stroke, discussing their cellular origin, biological function and disease significance. The emerging concept of lncRNA-circular RNA/ miRNA/ mRNA networks is outlined, upon which ncRNAs synergistically respond to hypoxia in order to modify disease responses. Particular notion is given to ncRNAs participating in at least two of the three conditions, which revealed a large degree of overlaps across pathophysiological conditions. Possible roles of EV-ncRNAs as therapeutic products or theranostic markers are defined., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: D.M.H., B.G. and T.R.D. hold a patent on extracellular vesicles for the treatment of inflammatory conditions (US9877989B2)., (© The author(s).)

Background: The safety and the benefits of reducing the risk of bleeding complications via protamine administration during the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear. This study aimed to systematically assessed the efficacy and safety of using protamine in PCI. Method: Potential academic studies were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science. The time range we retrieved from was that from the inception of electronic databases to March 31, 2022. Gray studies were identified from the references of included literature reports. Stata version 12.0 statistical software (StataCorp LP) was used to analyze the pooled data. Results: A total of seven studies were involved in our study. The overall participants of the protamine group were 4983, whereas it was 1953 in the nonprotamine group. This meta‐analysis indicated that protamine was preferable for PCI as its lower value of major bleeding (odds ratio [OR] = 0.489, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.362–0.661, p <.001) and minor bleeding (OR = 0.281, 95% CI: 0.123–0.643, p =.003). Additionally, the protamine did not tend to be related a higher incidence of mortality (p =.143), myocardial infarction (p =.990), and stent thrombosis (p =.698). Conclusions: Based on available evidence, use of protamine may reduce the risk of bleeding complications without increasing the risk of mortality, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Given the relevant possible biases in our study, adequately powered and better‐designed studies with long‐term follow‐up are required to reach a firmer conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Protamine can decrease the risk of hemorrhage during carotid recanalization. However, it may cause severe side effects. There is no consensus on the safety and efficacy of protamine during surgery. Thus, we conduct a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to compare the differences between the protamine and the no-protamine group. Method: We systematically obtained literature from Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and PubMed electronic databases. All four databases were scanned from 1937 when protamine was first adopted as a heparin antagonist until February 2021. The reference lists of identified studies were manually checked to determine other eligible studies that qualify. The articles were included in this meta-analysis as long as they met the criteria of PICOS; conference or commentary articles, letters, case report or series, and animal observation were excluded from this study. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and Cochrane Collaboration's tool are used to assess the risk of bias of each included observational study and RCT, respectively. Stata version 12.0 statistical software (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas) was adopted as statistical software. When I 2 < 50%, we consider that the data have no obvious heterogeneity, and we conduct a meta-analysis using the fixed-effect model. Otherwise, the random-effect model was performed. Result: A total of 11 studies, consisting of 94,618 participants, are included in this study. Our analysis found that the rate of wound hematoma had a significant difference among protamine and no-protamine patients (OR = 0.268, 95% CI = 0.093 to 0.774, p = 0.015). Furthermore, the incidence of hematoma requiring re-operation (0.7%) was significantly lower than that of patients without protamine (1.8%). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke, wound hematoma with hypertension, transient ischemic attacks (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), and death. Conclusion: Among included participants undergoing recanalization, the use of protamine is effective in reducing hematoma without increasing the risk of having other complications. Besides, more evidence-based performance is needed to supplement this opinion due to inherent limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]