Admission neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to predict mortality in burn patients: a meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Mohamed K A Awad, Ahmed Elsahhar, Mahmoud Alwakeel, Radwa Awad, Nada Gomaa, Amr Muhammad Abdo Salem, Mahmood Ramadan, Ghada Elsahhar, Reyad Essam Reyad Abdelbaky, Francois Fadell
{"title":"Admission neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to predict mortality in burn patients: a meta-analysis.","authors":"Mohamed K A Awad, Ahmed Elsahhar, Mahmoud Alwakeel, Radwa Awad, Nada Gomaa, Amr Muhammad Abdo Salem, Mahmood Ramadan, Ghada Elsahhar, Reyad Essam Reyad Abdelbaky, Francois Fadell","doi":"10.1186/s40635-024-00668-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) proves to be a convenient and cost-effective marker with studies showing that a high NLR can serve as a mortality indicator in burn cases. We conducted a meta-analysis aiming to explore whether on-admission NLR values could serve as predictors of mortality in burn patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase were searched from inception until January 2024. We included all studies investigating burn patients that contain information on the NLR value at the time of hospital admission and mortality outcomes. The studies were critically appraised using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies fulfilled our criteria with a total population of 1837 participants, including 1526 survivor Burn patients and 311 non-survivor Burn patients. The overall mean difference measured by random model showed a significant increase in NLR by 5.06 (95% CI 3.42, 6.68) p ≤ 0.001 for the non-survivor group over the survivors group with heterogeneity I<sup>2</sup> = 67.33%, p ≤ 0.001. A meta-regression was done to investigate the potential source of heterogeneity among studies. The results showed that age (p = 0.394), gender (p = 0.164), and sample size (p = 0.099) did not contribute to the source of heterogeneity, however, the burn surface area contributed significantly (p = 0.002). A leave-one-out meta-analysis was done, showing that omitting Le Qui et al., leads to significantly decrease the heterogeneity to be I<sup>2</sup> = 2.73%. Meta-regression repeated to assess the burn surface area again to be found noncontributing (p = 0.404).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings support that elevated NLR values can serve as a mortality indicator in burn cases. This will have a great clinical impact by aiding in stratifying the burn patients on admission.</p>","PeriodicalId":13750,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","volume":"12 1","pages":"86"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11445202/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-024-00668-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) proves to be a convenient and cost-effective marker with studies showing that a high NLR can serve as a mortality indicator in burn cases. We conducted a meta-analysis aiming to explore whether on-admission NLR values could serve as predictors of mortality in burn patients.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase were searched from inception until January 2024. We included all studies investigating burn patients that contain information on the NLR value at the time of hospital admission and mortality outcomes. The studies were critically appraised using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool.

Results: Nine studies fulfilled our criteria with a total population of 1837 participants, including 1526 survivor Burn patients and 311 non-survivor Burn patients. The overall mean difference measured by random model showed a significant increase in NLR by 5.06 (95% CI 3.42, 6.68) p ≤ 0.001 for the non-survivor group over the survivors group with heterogeneity I2 = 67.33%, p ≤ 0.001. A meta-regression was done to investigate the potential source of heterogeneity among studies. The results showed that age (p = 0.394), gender (p = 0.164), and sample size (p = 0.099) did not contribute to the source of heterogeneity, however, the burn surface area contributed significantly (p = 0.002). A leave-one-out meta-analysis was done, showing that omitting Le Qui et al., leads to significantly decrease the heterogeneity to be I2 = 2.73%. Meta-regression repeated to assess the burn surface area again to be found noncontributing (p = 0.404).

Conclusions: Our findings support that elevated NLR values can serve as a mortality indicator in burn cases. This will have a great clinical impact by aiding in stratifying the burn patients on admission.

预测烧伤患者死亡率的入院中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比率:一项荟萃分析。
背景:中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值(NLR)被证明是一种方便且具有成本效益的标志物,研究表明,高 NLR 可作为烧伤病例的死亡率指标。我们进行了一项荟萃分析,旨在探讨入院时的 NLR 值是否可作为烧伤患者的死亡率预测指标:方法:检索了从开始到 2024 年 1 月的 PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus 和 Embase。我们纳入了所有调查烧伤患者、包含入院时 NLR 值和死亡率结果信息的研究。我们使用 NIH 质量评估工具对这些研究进行了严格评估:9项研究符合我们的标准,共有1837名参与者,其中包括1526名烧伤幸存者和311名非烧伤幸存者。随机模型测量的总体平均差异显示,非幸存者组比幸存者组的 NLR 显著增加 5.06 (95% CI 3.42, 6.68) p ≤ 0.001,异质性 I2 = 67.33%,p ≤ 0.001。为研究异质性的潜在来源,进行了元回归。结果显示,年龄(p = 0.394)、性别(p = 0.164)和样本大小(p = 0.099)对异质性来源没有影响,但烧伤面积对异质性有显著影响(p = 0.002)。一项剔除荟萃分析表明,剔除 Le Qui 等人的研究可显著降低异质性,I2 = 2.73%。重复评估烧伤表面积的元回归再次发现无贡献(p = 0.404):我们的研究结果表明,NLR 值升高可作为烧伤病例的死亡率指标。结论:我们的研究结果表明,NLR 值升高可作为烧伤病例的死亡率指标,这将对临床产生重大影响,有助于对入院的烧伤患者进行分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信