| Literature DB >> 26119473 |
Kyu-Sun Choi1, Hyun Jung Kim2, Hyoung-Joon Chun1, Jae Min Kim1, Hyeong-Joong Yi1, Jin-Hwan Cheong1, Choong-Hyun Kim1, Suck-Jun Oh1, Yong Ko1, Young-Soo Kim1, Koang-Hum Bak1, Je-Il Ryu1, Wonhee Kim3, Taeho Lim4, Hyeong Sik Ahn2, Il Min Ahn5, Seon-Heui Lee6.
Abstract
Copeptin, the C-terminal part of provasopressin, has emerged as a novel prognostic marker after hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke. The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess the prognostic significance of plasma copeptin level on functional outcome and mortality in patients with acute stroke using a meta-analysis of the available evidence. Thirteen relevant studies from 2,746 patients were finally included in our study. An elevated plasma copeptin level was associated with an increased risk of unfavorable outcome and mortality after stroke (OR 1.77; 95% CI, 1.44-2.19 and OR 3.90; 95% CI 3.07-4.95, respectively). The result of the pooled measure on standardized mean difference (SMD) was that plasma copeptin levels were found to be significantly higher in patients who died compared to survivors (SMD 1.70; 95% CI, 1.36-2.03). A stratified analysis by study region showed significant differences in SMD of copeptin, and the heterogeneity among studies was significantly decreased. However, the positive association of copeptin with poor prognosis after stroke was consistent in each stratified analysis. The present meta-analysis suggests that early measurement of plasma copeptin could provide better prognostic information about functional outcome and mortality in patients with acute stroke.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26119473 PMCID: PMC4483773 DOI: 10.1038/srep11665
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flow diagram for identification of relevant studies.
Characteristics of studies included in the review.
| Katan M | Western | 359 | 2006–2007 | Ischemic | <72 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 75 (63–83) | 41 | 5 (2–10) | 3 mo. | 12 | 42 |
| Zweifel C | Western | 40 | 2006–2007 | Hemorrhagic | <72 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 71 (64–78) | 45 | 14 (13–15) | 1 mo. | 15 | 55 |
| Dong XQ | China | 86 | 2006–2008 | Hemorrhagic | <24 h | ELISA(Cusabio) | 65 (42–80) | 23.3 | 8 (5–13) | 1 wk. | 37.2 | — |
| Zhang X | China | 89 | 2007–2009 | Hemorrhagic | <24 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 65 (41–79) | 39.3 | 21 (6–31) | 1 y. | 42.7 | 62.9 |
| Zhang JL | China | 245 | 2007–2010 | Ischemic | <72 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 73 (64–82) | 42 | 6 (3–12) | 1 y. | 16.7 | 40.4 |
| Zhu XD | China | 303 | 2008–2010 | Hemorrhagic | <24 h | ELISA(Cusabio) | 43.9 ± 12.4 | 56.7 | 2.3 ± 1.2 | 1 y. | 13.9 | 29.7 |
| De Marchis | Western | 783 | 2009–2011 | Ischemic | <24 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 71 (60–80) | 38.1 | 6 (3–13) | 3 mo. | 15.1 | 38.3 |
| Dong X | China | 125 | 2010–2011 | Ischemic | <48 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 69 (61–85) | 44.8 | 7 (3–12) | 3 mo. | 14.4 | 32.8 |
| Fung C | Western | 18 | 2010–2011 | Hemorrhagic | Adm. | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 57 (48–67) | 66.6 | — | 6 mo. | 22.2 | 27.7 |
| Tu WJ | China | 189 | 2010–2012 | Ischemic | <48 h | immunoassay(B.R.A.H.M.S) | 66 (58–75) | 38.1 | 7 (5–12) | 3 mo. | 13.2 | 38.1 |
| Wei ZJ | China | 271 | 2010–2012 | Hemorrhagic | <24 h | ELISA(Cusabio) | 69 (59–81) | 46.9 | 11 (7–15) | 3 mo. | 12.5 | 30.3 |
| Yu WH | China | 118 | 2010–2013 | Hemorrhagic | <6 h | ELISA(Phoenix pharm) | 64 (48–79) | 39 | 15 (5–23) | 6 mo. | 31.4 | 57.6 |
| Zhang A | China | 120 | 2013 | Hemorrhagic | Adm. | ELISA(Phoenix pharm) | 60 (32–84) | 37 | 10.6 ± 4.6 | 3 mo. | 20 | 60 |
Adm., at admission; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; y, year; mo., month; wk., week; Age and Stroke severity were presented as median (IQR) or mean ± SD.
*National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score.
**Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score.
***World Federation of Neurosurgeons Societies (WFNS) grade.
Figure 2Meta-analysis of relevant studies assessing functional outcome according to stroke subtype (random effects model).
Ten observational studies were included. CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; SE, standard error.
Figure 3Meta-analysis of relevant studies assessing mortality according to stroke subtype (random effects model).
Eleven observational studies were included. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; IV, inverse variance; SE, standard error.
Summary of estimated odds ratios for functional outcome and mortality among subgroup.
| Acute stroke | ||||||||
| All | 10 | 1.84 (1.48, 2.29) | <0.0001 | 82 | 11 | 2.66 (1.93, 3.65) | <0.0001 | 93 |
| 9 | 3.61 (2.79, 4.66) | 0.13 | 36 | |||||
| Stroke subtype | ||||||||
| Hemorrhagic | 5 | 1.36 (1.13–1.64) | 0.002 | 77 | 6 | 2.16 (1.51, 3.09) | <0.0001 | 95 |
| 4 | 3.66 (2.49, 5.36) | 0.09 | 53 | |||||
| Ischemic | 5 | 2.55 (1.97, 3.31) | 0.66 | 0 | 5 | 3.47 (2.38, 5.04) | 0.27 | 23 |
| Study size | ||||||||
| <100 | 2 | 3.82 (0.26, 56.96) | 0.01 | 83 | 3 | 1.13 (1.03, 1.24) | 0.18 | 42 |
| ≥100 | 8 | 2.09 (1.55, 2.80) | <0.0001 | 80 | 8 | 3.64 (2.76, 4.80) | 0.09 | 44 |
| Study region | ||||||||
| Western | 3 | 2.66 (1.46, 4.84) | 0.16 | 45 | 3 | 2.67 (1.87, 3.80) | 0.52 | 0 |
| China | 7 | 1.63 (1.32, 2.03) | <0.0001 | 81 | 8 | 2.55 (1.80, 3.63) | <0.0001 | 95 |
| 6 | 4.00 (3.00, 5.33) | 0.20 | 31 | |||||
| Number of female | ||||||||
| <40% | 4 | 1.48 (1.15, 1.90) | 0.006 | 76 | 5 | 2.09 (1.46, 3.00) | <0.0001 | 96 |
| 3 | 3.79 (2.18, 6.60) | 0.02 | 76 | |||||
| ≥40% | 6 | 2.88 (1.55, 5.34) | <0.0001 | 85 | 6 | 3.42 (2.59, 4.52) | 0.56 | 0 |
| Analysis | ||||||||
| Univariate | 1 | N/A | 2 | 5.02 (3.56, 7.09) | 0.39 | 0 | ||
| Multivariate | 9 | N/A | 9 | 2.25 (1.69, 2.99) | <0.0001 | 91 | ||
| 7 | 3.21 (2.51, 4.11) | 0.33 | 13 | |||||
| Measurement time | ||||||||
| ≤24 hour | 4 | 1.51 (1.19, 1.92) | 0.0003 | 84 | 5 | 1.70 (1.30, 2.23) | <0.0001 | 92 |
| 3 | 2.79 (2.07, 3.75) | 0.27 | 24 | |||||
| ≤72 hour | 6 | 2.61 (1.52, 4.49) | 0.0004 | 78 | 6 | 4.85 (3.69, 6.37) | 0.89 | 0 |
| Outcome assessment | ||||||||
| Within 3 month | 7 | 2.40 (1.59, 3.63) | 0.0005 | 75 | 8 | 3.08 (1.64, 5.79) | <0.0001 | 94 |
| 7 | 3.71 (2.84, 4.86) | 0.20 | 30 | |||||
| Within 1 year | 3 | 1.34 (1.08, 1.67) | 0.004 | 82 | 3 | 2.30 (0.95, 5.57) | <0.001 | 90 |
| Study quality | ||||||||
| High | 8 | 1.96 (1.52, 2.53) | <0.0001 | 84 | 8 | 2.94 (1.70, 5.08) | <0.0001 | 91 |
| Low | 2 | 3.95 (0.29, 54.63) | 0.02 | 82 | 3 | 2.57 (0.73, 9.00) | <0.0001 | 97 |
N, the number of studies; OR, odds ratio; 95% CI, 95% confident interval; N/A, not available.
*indicate a subgroup analysis after excluding articles which were the key contributors to between-study heterogeneity.
Figure 4Standardized mean copeptin values in death group and survival group and a pooled estimate (random effects model).
Thirteen observational studies were included. CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; SD, standard deviation.
Stratified meta-analysis of copeptin levels and poor outcome in patients with acute stroke.
| Acute stroke | ||||||||
| All | 12 | 1.09 (0.81, 1.37) | <0.0001 | 90 | 13 | 1.70 (1.36, 2.03) | <0.0001 | 87 |
| Stroke subtype | ||||||||
| Hemorrhagic | 7 | 1.25 (0.97–1.53) | 0.007 | 66 | 8 | 1.70 (1.18, 2.21) | <0.0001 | 87 |
| Ischemic | 5 | 0.96 (0.60, 1.32) | <0.0001 | 90 | 5 | 1.67 (1.21, 2.12) | <0.0001 | 87 |
| Study size | ||||||||
| <100 | 3 | 0.75 (–0.01, 1.51) | 0.02 | 73 | 4 | 1.27 (0.84, 1.70) | 0.17 | 40 |
| ≥100 | 9 | 1.16 (0.85, 1.48) | <0.0001 | 92 | 9 | 1.87 (1.46, 2.28) | <0.0001 | 91 |
| Study region | ||||||||
| Western | 4 | 0.59 (0.42, 0.77) | 0.23 | 30 | 4 | 1.18 (1.01, 1.35) | 0.54 | 0 |
| China | 8 | 1.33 (1.09, 1.58) | 0.0002 | 75 | 9 | 1.95 (1.56, 2.33) | <0.0001 | 84 |
| Number of female | ||||||||
| <40% | 5 | 1.21 (0.67, 1.75) | <0.0001 | 93 | 6 | 1.73 (1.26, 2.19) | <0.0001 | 87 |
| ≥40% | 7 | 1.01 (0.66, 1.36) | <0.0001 | 86 | 7 | 1.65 (1.13, 2.17) | <0.0001 | 88 |
| Method of estimation of the mean and SD | ||||||||
| Described in the study | 4 | 1.43 (1.23, 1.62) | 0.33 | 13 | 4 | 1.76 (1.12, 2.39) | <0.0001 | 88 |
| Estimated by recognized formulas | 8 | 0.94 (0.60, 1.27) | <0.0001 | 90 | 9 | 1.66 (1.24, 2.09) | <0.0001 | 88 |
| Measurement time | ||||||||
| ≤24 hour | 5 | 1.21 (0.68, 1.74) | <0.0001 | 94 | 6 | 1.62 (1.18, 2.06) | <0.0001 | 88 |
| ≤72 hour | 7 | 1.01 (0.67, 1.35) | <0.0001 | 82 | 7 | 1.75 (1.21, 2.29) | <0.0001 | 86 |
| Outcome assessment | ||||||||
| Within 3 month | 9 | 1.04 (0.71, 1.38) | <0.0001 | 90 | 10 | 1.70 (1.28, 2.12) | <0.0001 | 89 |
| Within 1 year | 3 | 1.22 (0.63, 1.80) | <0.0001 | 90 | 3 | 1.68 (1.08, 2.27) | 0.001 | 85 |
| Study quality | ||||||||
| High | 9 | 1.15 (0.83, 1.47) | <0.0001 | 91 | 9 | 1.69 (1.34, 2.05) | <0.0001 | 88 |
| Low | 3 | 0.79 (–0.08, 1.65) | 0.005 | 81 | 4 | 1.61 (0.59, 2.63) | <0.0001 | 87 |
N, the number of studies; SMD, standardized mean difference; 95% CI, 95% confident interval.
*indicate a significant subgroup difference between copeptin level and mortality according to the study region.
**indicate a significant subgroup difference between copeptin level and unfavorable outcome according to the study region/method of estimation of the mean and SD.
Figure 5Standardized mean copeptin values in unfavorable and favorable outcome groups and a pooled estimate (random effects model).
Twelve observational studies were included. CI, confidence interval; IV, inverse variance; SD, standard deviation.