Cargando…
Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection (AD) is a serious and fatal vascular disease. The earlier the condition of AD patients can be assessed precisely, the more scientifically controlled the patient’s condition will be. Therefore, timely and accurate diagnosis is significant for AD. Blood biomarker testing...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10563263/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37817089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03448-9 |
_version_ | 1785118301490249728 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Hongjian Li, Yunjie Li, Zheqian Shi, Yanli Zhu, Haobo |
author_facet | Chen, Hongjian Li, Yunjie Li, Zheqian Shi, Yanli Zhu, Haobo |
author_sort | Chen, Hongjian |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection (AD) is a serious and fatal vascular disease. The earlier the condition of AD patients can be assessed precisely, the more scientifically controlled the patient’s condition will be. Therefore, timely and accurate diagnosis is significant for AD. Blood biomarker testing as a method of liquid biopsy can improve the diagnostic efficiency of AD. This study conducted a systematic review of the current blood diagnostic biomarkers of AD. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to January 1, 2023, using the terms “aortic dissection”, “serum”, “plasma” and “diagnosis”. Stata 12.0 software was used to perform Random effects meta-analysis was performed using Stata 12.0 software to determine the effect sizes and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Then, a summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve was drawn, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated. RESULTS: D-dimer had the best sensitivity and AUC for AD, with values of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93–0.97), respectively. The sensitivity and AUC values for D-dimer with a cut-off value of 500 ng/mL were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95–0.99) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92–0.96), respectively. In contrast, microRNA had a better specificity value for AD, at 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73–0.83). CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer and microRNA have good accuracy in the diagnosis of AD, but the specificity of D-dimer is worse, and studies of microRNA are insufficient. The combination of different biomarkers can improve the diagnostic accuracy. Other blood biomarkers are related to the pathological progression of AD and can be selected according to pathological progress. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-023-03448-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10563263 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105632632023-10-11 Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis Chen, Hongjian Li, Yunjie Li, Zheqian Shi, Yanli Zhu, Haobo BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection (AD) is a serious and fatal vascular disease. The earlier the condition of AD patients can be assessed precisely, the more scientifically controlled the patient’s condition will be. Therefore, timely and accurate diagnosis is significant for AD. Blood biomarker testing as a method of liquid biopsy can improve the diagnostic efficiency of AD. This study conducted a systematic review of the current blood diagnostic biomarkers of AD. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to January 1, 2023, using the terms “aortic dissection”, “serum”, “plasma” and “diagnosis”. Stata 12.0 software was used to perform Random effects meta-analysis was performed using Stata 12.0 software to determine the effect sizes and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Then, a summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve was drawn, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated. RESULTS: D-dimer had the best sensitivity and AUC for AD, with values of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93–0.97), respectively. The sensitivity and AUC values for D-dimer with a cut-off value of 500 ng/mL were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95–0.99) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92–0.96), respectively. In contrast, microRNA had a better specificity value for AD, at 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73–0.83). CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer and microRNA have good accuracy in the diagnosis of AD, but the specificity of D-dimer is worse, and studies of microRNA are insufficient. The combination of different biomarkers can improve the diagnostic accuracy. Other blood biomarkers are related to the pathological progression of AD and can be selected according to pathological progress. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-023-03448-9. BioMed Central 2023-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10563263/ /pubmed/37817089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03448-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Chen, Hongjian Li, Yunjie Li, Zheqian Shi, Yanli Zhu, Haobo Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | diagnostic biomarkers and aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10563263/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37817089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03448-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenhongjian diagnosticbiomarkersandaorticdissectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liyunjie diagnosticbiomarkersandaorticdissectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lizheqian diagnosticbiomarkersandaorticdissectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shiyanli diagnosticbiomarkersandaorticdissectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhuhaobo diagnosticbiomarkersandaorticdissectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |