» Articles » PMID: 26134045

Prognostic Value of Biomarkers in Acute Non-massive Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal Lung
Specialty Pulmonary Medicine
Date 2015 Jul 3
PMID 26134045
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Various biomarkers have been evaluated to risk stratify patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). We aimed to summarize the available evidence to compare the prognostic value of three most widely studied biomarkers in normotensive patients with acute PE.

Method: A systematic literature review of database, including Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane, was done. Studies were included if those were done on patients with acute PE and serum troponin or brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal proBNP (BNP/NT-proBNP) or Heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP) assay was done. The primary end point was short-term all-cause mortality. The secondary end points were PE-related mortality and serious adverse events.

Results: All three biomarkers were significantly associated with increased risk for short-term all-cause mortality, PE-related mortality and serious adverse events. All-cause mortality: troponin [odds ratio (OR) 4.80; 95% CI 3.25-7.08, I(2) = 54%], BNP or NT-proBNP (OR 7.98; 95% CI 4.34-14.67, I(2) = 0%); PE-related mortality: troponin (OR 3.80; 95% CI 2.74-5.27, I(2) = 0%), BNP or NT-proBNP (OR 7.57; 95% CI 2.89-19.81, I (2) = 0%) and H-FABP (OR 25.97; 95% CI 6.63-101.66, I(2) = 40%). H-FABP has the lowest negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of 0.17 for mortality followed by high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) with NLR of 0.21.

Conclusion: None of the biomarker identifies a subgroup of patients who can be managed as an outpatient versus patients who may get benefit from thrombolytics with certainty; however, H-FABP and hs-cTnT showed some promising results and should be investigated further.

Citing Articles

Role of serum biomarkers in predicting management strategies for acute pulmonary embolism.

Elshahaat H, Zayed N, Ateya M, Safwat M, El Hawary A, Abozaid M Heliyon. 2023; 9(11):e21068.

PMID: 38027791 PMC: 10651461. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21068.


Troponin dependent 30-day mortality in patients with acute pulmonary embolism.

Sonne-Holm E, Winther-Jensen M, Bang L, Kober L, Fosbol E, Carlsen J J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2023; 56(3):485-494.

PMID: 37486553 PMC: 10439039. DOI: 10.1007/s11239-023-02864-0.


D-Dimer beyond Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism: Its Implication for Long-Term Prognosis in Cardio-Oncology Era.

Himeno M, Nagatomo Y, Miyauchi A, Sakamoto A, Kiyose K, Yukino-Iwashita M J Pers Med. 2023; 13(2).

PMID: 36836459 PMC: 9962345. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13020226.


Ventricular-arterial decoupling is associated with in-hospital adverse events in normotensive pulmonary embolism.

Kiamanesh O, Prosperi-Porta G, Harper L, Solverson K, Boiteau P, Helmersen D Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022; 38(12):2655-2665.

PMID: 36445659 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-022-02677-x.


Right heart failure in left heart disease: imaging, functional, and biochemical aspects of right ventricular dysfunction.

Ghio S, Acquaro M, Agostoni P, Ambrosio G, Carluccio E, Castiglione V Heart Fail Rev. 2022; 28(4):1009-1022.

PMID: 36385328 DOI: 10.1007/s10741-022-10276-0.


References
1.
Kang D, Sun J, Park K, Lim H . Usefulness of combined assessment with computed tomographic signs of right ventricular dysfunction and cardiac troponin T for risk stratification of acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Cardiol. 2011; 108(1):133-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.03.009. View

2.
Kostrubiec M, Pruszczyk P, Bochowicz A, Pacho R, Szulc M, Kaczynska A . Biomarker-based risk assessment model in acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26(20):2166-72. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi336. View

3.
Singanayagam A, Scally C, Al-Khairalla M, Leitch L, HILL L, Chalmers J . Are biomarkers additive to pulmonary embolism severity index for severity assessment in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism?. QJM. 2010; 104(2):125-31. DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/hcq168. View

4.
Grimes D, Schulz K . Refining clinical diagnosis with likelihood ratios. Lancet. 2005; 365(9469):1500-5. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66422-7. View

5.
Herbison P, Hay-Smith J, Gillespie W . Adjustment of meta-analyses on the basis of quality scores should be abandoned. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59(12):1249-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.008. View