Suppr超能文献

炎症标志物在心血管风险分层中的评价。

Critical appraisal of inflammatory markers in cardiovascular risk stratification.

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine .

出版信息

Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2014 Oct;51(5):263-79. doi: 10.3109/10408363.2014.913549. Epub 2014 Jun 11.

Abstract

Despite great progress in prevention strategies, pharmacotherapy and interventional treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD), cardiovascular events still constitute the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the modern world. Traditional risk factors, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking, obesity, dyslipidemia, and positive family history account for the occurrence of the majority of these events, but not all of them. Adequate risk assessment remains the most challenging in individuals classified into low or intermediate risk categories. Inflammation plays a key role in the initiation and promotion of atherosclerosis and may lead to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) by the induction of plaque instability. For this reason, numerous inflammatory markers have been extensively investigated as potential candidates for the enhancement of cardiovascular risk assessment. This review aims to critically assess the clinical utility of well-established (C-reactive protein [CRP] and fibrinogen), newer (lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 [Lp-PLA2] and myeloperoxidase [MPO]) and novel (growth differentiation factor-15 [GDF-15]) inflammatory markers which, reflect different pathophysiological pathways underlying CAD. Although according to the traditional approach all discussed inflammatory markers were shown to be associated with the risk of future cardiovascular events in individuals with and without CAD, their clear clinical utility remains not fully elucidated. Current recommendations of numerous scientific societies predominantly advocate routine assessment of CRP in healthy people with intermediate cardiovascular risk. However, these recommendations substantially vary in their strength among particular societies. These discrepancies have a multifactorial background, including: (i) the strong prognostic value of CRP supported by solid scientific evidence and proven to be comparable in magnitude with that of total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or hypertension, (ii) favourable analytical characteristics of commercially available CRP assays, (iii) lack of CRP specificity and causal relationship between CRP concentration and cardiovascular risk, and (iv) CRP dependence on other classical risk factors. Of major importance, CRP measurement in healthy men ≥50 years of age or healthy women ≥60 years of age with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <130 mg/dL may be helpful in the selection of patients for statin therapy. Additionally, evaluation of CRP and fibrinogen or Lp-PLA2 may be considered to facilitate risk stratification in ACS patients and in healthy individuals with intermediate cardiovascular risk, respectively. Nevertheless, the clinical utility of CRP requires further investigation in a broad spectrum of CAD patients, while other promising inflammatory markers, particularly GDF-15 and Lp-PLA2, should be tested in individuals both with and without established CAD. Further studies should also focus on novel performance metrics such as measures of discrimination, calibration and reclassification, in order to better address the clinical utility of investigated biomarkers and to avoid misleadingly optimistic results. It also has to be emphasized that, due to the multifactorial pathogenesis of CAD, detailed risk stratification remains a complex process also involving, beyond assessment of inflammatory biomarkers, the patient's clinical characteristics, results of imaging examinations, electrocardiographic findings and other laboratory parameters (e.g. lipid profile, indices of renal function, markers of left ventricular overload and fibrosis, and biomarkers of myocardial necrosis, preferably cardiac troponins).

摘要

尽管在预防策略、药物治疗和冠状动脉疾病(CAD)介入治疗方面取得了巨大进展,但心血管事件仍然是现代世界导致死亡和发病的主要原因。传统的危险因素,包括高血压、糖尿病、吸烟、肥胖、血脂异常和阳性家族史,占大多数这些事件的发生,但并非全部。在低危或中危类别的人群中,充分的风险评估仍然是最具挑战性的。炎症在动脉粥样硬化的起始和促进中起着关键作用,并可能通过诱导斑块不稳定而导致急性冠脉综合征(ACS)。出于这个原因,大量的炎症标志物已被广泛研究作为增强心血管风险评估的潜在候选物。本综述旨在批判性地评估已建立的(C 反应蛋白[CRP]和纤维蛋白原)、较新的(脂蛋白相关磷脂酶 A2 [Lp-PLA2]和髓过氧化物酶[MPO])和新型的(生长分化因子-15 [GDF-15])炎症标志物的临床实用性,这些标志物反映了 CAD 背后不同的病理生理途径。尽管根据传统方法,所有讨论的炎症标志物都显示与有和没有 CAD 的个体未来心血管事件的风险相关,但它们的明确临床实用性仍未完全阐明。许多科学协会的现行建议主要主张对有中危心血管风险的健康人群常规评估 CRP。然而,这些建议在特定协会之间的强度存在很大差异。这些差异有多种背景,包括:(i)CRP 具有强大的预后价值,得到了坚实的科学证据的支持,并且与总胆固醇和高密度脂蛋白胆固醇或高血压的程度相当,(ii)商业上可用的 CRP 检测方法具有良好的分析特性,(iii)CRP 缺乏特异性以及 CRP 浓度与心血管风险之间的因果关系,以及(iv)CRP 依赖于其他经典危险因素。最重要的是,在 LDL 胆固醇<130mg/dL 的年龄≥50 岁的健康男性或年龄≥60 岁的健康女性中测量 CRP 可能有助于选择他汀类药物治疗的患者。此外,在 ACS 患者和中危心血管风险的健康个体中,分别评估 CRP 和纤维蛋白原或 Lp-PLA2 可考虑用于风险分层。然而,CRP 的临床实用性需要在更广泛的 CAD 患者中进行进一步研究,而其他有前途的炎症标志物,特别是 GDF-15 和 Lp-PLA2,应在有和没有已建立的 CAD 的个体中进行测试。进一步的研究还应侧重于新的性能指标,如区分度、校准度和再分类度的测量,以便更好地解决所研究生物标志物的临床实用性,并避免误导性的乐观结果。还必须强调的是,由于 CAD 的多因素发病机制,详细的风险分层仍然是一个复杂的过程,除了评估炎症生物标志物外,还涉及患者的临床特征、影像学检查结果、心电图发现和其他实验室参数(例如血脂谱、肾功能指标、左心室负荷和纤维化标志物以及心肌坏死标志物,最好是心脏肌钙蛋白)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验