UNASSIGNED: We conducted a systematic search in online databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar up to March 4th 2024, to identify relevant studies. The random-effect model, employing inverse variance for mean differences (MD) and Mantel-Haenszel methods for odds ratios (OR) were utilized to combine the data. Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) appraisal tool was employed to assess the quality of included studies.
UNASSIGNED: Our systematic review contains 15 articles with a total sample size of 2,030 ACS patients. Pooled analysis revealed significant differences in IPF levels of ACS patients compared to healthy controls (MD (95%CI): 2.85 (0.86, 4.85), P-value = 0.004) and stable angina patients (MD (95%CI): 0.58 (0.23, 0.92), P-value < 0.001). Subgroup comparisons within ACS patients demonstrated higher IPF levels in myocardial infarction (MI) vs. unstable angina (UA) (MD (95%CI): 1.81 (0.41, 3.22), P-value = 0.01), ST elevation MI (STEMI) vs. non-ST elevation (NSTEMI) ACS (MD (95%CI): 0.74 (0.31, 1.17), P-value < 0.001), and NSTEMI vs. UA (MD (95% CI): 1.07 (0.24, 1.90), P-value = 0.01).
UNASSIGNED: IPF levels could increase in patients with ACS, particularly during the acute phase of STEMI. This suggests that IPF may be a useful biomarker for early diagnosis of ACS. Additionally, IPF levels may help differentiate between ACS subtypes.
■我们在包括MEDLINE在内的在线数据库中进行了系统的搜索,Scopus,和截至2024年3月4日的谷歌学者,以确定相关研究。随机效应模型,采用平均差(MD)的逆方差和比值比(OR)的Mantel-Haenszel方法来合并数据.采用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(JBI)评估工具来评估纳入研究的质量。
■我们的系统评价包含15篇文章,总样本量为2,030名ACS患者。汇总分析显示,与健康对照组相比,ACS患者的IPF水平存在显着差异(MD(95CI):2.85(0.86,4.85),P值=0.004)和稳定型心绞痛患者(MD(95CI):0.58(0.23,0.92),P值<0.001)。ACS患者的亚组比较显示,心肌梗死(MI)的IPF水平高于不稳定型心绞痛(UA)(MD(95CI):1.81(0.41,3.22),P值=0.01),ST段抬高MI(STEMI)与非ST段抬高(NSTEMI)ACS(MD(95CI):0.74(0.31,1.17),P值<0.001),和NSTEMIvs.UA(MD(95%CI):1.07(0.24,1.90),P值=0.01)。
■ACS患者的IPF水平可能会增加,特别是在STEMI的急性期。这表明IPF可能是早期诊断ACS的有用生物标志物。此外,IPF水平可能有助于区分ACS亚型。