Systematic Review of Circulating, Biomechanical, and Genetic Markers for the Prediction of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Growth and Rupture

Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease

Sidney M. Rubinstein¹  Geert Jan Tangelder²  Willem Wisselink³  Maarten Truijers³  Lisanne R. Merkestein³  Jorn P. Meekel³  Kak Khee Yeung³  Menno E. Groeneveld³ 

[1] Department of Health Sciences and Amsterdam Public Health research institute VU University Amsterdam The Netherlands;Department of Physiology Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences (ACS) VU University Medical Center (VUmc) Amsterdam The Netherlands;Department of Vascular Surgery Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences (ACS) VU University Medical Center (VUmc) Amsterdam The Netherlands;

关键词: abdominal aortic aneurysm;    biomechanical marker;    circulating biomarker;    genetic marker;    growth;    rupture;   

DOI  :  10.1161/JAHA.117.007791

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Background The natural course of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) is growth and rupture if left untreated. Numerous markers have been investigated; however, none are broadly acknowledged. Our aim was to identify potential prognostic markers for AAA growth and rupture. Methods and Results Potential circulating, biomechanical, and genetic markers were studied. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in February 2017, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent researchers. Plausibility of markers was based on the amount of publications regarding the marker (more than 3), pooled sample size (more than 100), bias risk and statistical significance of the studies. Eighty‐two studies were included, which examined circulating (n=40), biomechanical (n=27), and genetic markers (n=7) and combinations of markers (n=8). Factors with an increased expansion risk included: AAA diameter (9 studies; n=1938; low bias risk), chlamydophila pneumonia (4 studies; n=311; medium bias risk), S‐elastin peptides (3 studies; n=205; medium bias risk), fluorodeoxyglucose uptake (3 studies; n=104; medium bias risk), and intraluminal thrombus size (5 studies; n=758; medium bias risk). Factors with an increased rupture risk rupture included: peak wall stress (9 studies; n=579; medium bias risk) and AAA diameter (8 studies; n=354; medium bias risk). No meta‐analysis was conducted because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Conclusions We identified 5 potential markers with a prognostic value for AAA growth and 2 for rupture. While interpreting these data, one must realize that conclusions are based on small sample sizes and clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Prospective and methodological consonant studies are strongly urged to further study these potential markers.

【 授权许可】

Unknown