Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the prognostic value of baseline red cell distribution width (RDW) in patients with coronary artery diseases (CADs) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by conducting a meta-analysis.
Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Data source PubMed, Embase, Wanfang, CNKI and VIP databases were searched from their inceptions to 19 June 2019.
Eligible criteria Studies investigating the value of baseline RDW for predicting all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in patients with CAD undergoing PCI were included.
Data extraction and synthesis Two authors independently extracted the data and evaluated the methodological quality using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. STATA V.12.0 software was applied to produce the forest plots using a random-effect model.
Results Twelve studies (13 articles) involving 17 113 patients were included and analysed. Comparison between the highest and lowest RDW category indicated that the pooled risk ratio (RR) was 1.77 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.37) for all-cause mortality, 1.70 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.32) for cardiovascular mortality and 1.62 (95% CI 1.21 to 2.18) for MACEs. The predictive effect of elevated RDW for all-cause mortality was stronger in the subgroup of patients without anaemia (RR 4.59; 95% CI 3.07 to 6.86) than with anaemia.
Conclusions This meta-analysis indicated that elevated RDW was associated with higher risk of mortality and adverse cardiac events in patients with CAD undergoing PCI. The value of elevated RDW for predicting all-cause mortality appears to be stronger in patients without anaemia. RDW may be served as a promising prognostic biomarker in patients undergoing PCI.
- red cell distribution width
- major adverse cardiac events
- all-cause mortality
- percutaneous coronary intervention
- meta-analysis
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors DB contributed to the study design and interpretation of results. GL and FK searched the literature, abstracted data and assessed the study quality. XW and JL conducted the data analysis. CJ drafted the manuscript and GL revised the manuscript. All authors had full access to the data in the study and took responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data.
Funding This work was supported by Zhejiang Science Research Fund of Traditional Chinese Medicine (Category A; 2018ZA128).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. No additional data are available.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.