The association of neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio and platelet–lymphocyte ratio with retinal vein occlusion: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhengyang Liu ◽  
Luke A. Perry ◽  
Jahan C. Penny‐Dimri ◽  
Dev Raveendran ◽  
Monica L. Hu ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan-dan Zhu ◽  
Xun Liu

Purpose. To evaluate the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the platelet/lymphocyte ratio(PLR) value in the development of branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO)patients. Methods. 81 patients with BRVO and 81 age and sex-matched subjects were recruited as the control group. The BRVO diagnosis was confirmed under comprehensive ophthalmologic examinations. NLR and PLR parameters obtained from peripheral blood were recorded. Results. Both the mean NLR and PLR was significantly higher in the BRVO group compared with the control group (p < 0.001). In ROC analysis, the AUC for NLR was 0.82, and NLR of >2.48 predicted BRVO with a sensitivity of 58% and specificity of 98%. The AUC for PLR was 0.78, and PLR of >110.2 predicted BRVO with a sensitivity of 72% and specificity of 72%. Conclusion. The current study demonstrated that BRVO patients had increased NLR and PLR levels compared with control subjects. The NLR and PLR may be used as independent predictors for identifying risk for the development of BRVO.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 2154
Author(s):  
Mahmut Atum ◽  
Isa Yuvaci ◽  
Selcuk Yaylaci ◽  
Ahmed Genc ◽  
Turgay Ucak ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 241 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeany Q. Li ◽  
Jan Henrik Terheyden ◽  
Thomas Welchowski ◽  
Matthias Schmid ◽  
Julia Letow ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e032128
Author(s):  
Shuai Ming ◽  
Kunpeng Xie ◽  
Mingzhu Yang ◽  
Huijuan He ◽  
Ya Li ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) implant and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents in the treatment of macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).Data sourcesPubMed, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched from inception to 10 December 2019, without language restrictions.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world observation studies comparing the efficacy of DEX implant and anti-VEGF agents for the treatment of patients with RVO, naïve or almost naïve to both arms, were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently extracted data for mean changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST) and product safety. Review Manager V.5.3 and GRADE were used to synthesise the data and validate the evidence, respectively.ResultsFour RCTs and 12 real-world studies were included. An average lower letter gain in BCVA was determined for the DEX implant (mean difference (MD) = −6.59; 95% CI −8.87 to −4.22 letters) administered at a retreatment interval of 5–6 months. Results were similar (MD6 months=−12.68; 95% CI −21.98 to −3.37 letters; MD12 months=−9.69; 95% CI −12.01 to −7.37 letters) at 6 and 12 months. The DEX implant resulted in comparable or marginally less CST reduction at months 6 and 12 but introduced relatively higher risks of elevated intraocular pressure (RR=3.89; 95% CI 2.16 to 7.03) and cataract induction (RR=5.22; 95% CI 1.67 to 16.29). Most real-life studies reported an insignificant numerical gain in letters for anti-VEGF drugs relative to that for DEX implant. However, the latter achieved comparable efficacy with a 4-month dosage interval.ConclusionCompared with anti-VEGF agents, DEX implant required fewer injections but had inferior functional efficacy and safety. Real-life trials supplemented the efficacy data for DEX implant.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. e13151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guang-Tao Min ◽  
Yu-Min Li ◽  
Nan Yao ◽  
Jun Wang ◽  
Hong-Peng Wang ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (16) ◽  
pp. 4166
Author(s):  
Chellan Kumarasamy ◽  
Vaibhav Tiwary ◽  
Krishnan Sunil ◽  
Deepa Suresh ◽  
Sameep Shetty ◽  
...  

Inflammation plays a major role in cancer development and progression and has the potential to be used as a prognostic marker in cancer. Previous studies have attempted to evaluate Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) or monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) as indicators of inflammation/prognostic markers in cancer, but there is no common consensus on their application in clinical practice. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to (a) assess the prognostic efficacy of all three prognostic markers in comparison to each other and (b) investigate the prognostic potential of these three markers in HNC. The study followed PRISMA guidelines, with the literature being collated from multiple bibliographic databases. Preliminary and secondary screening were carried out using stringent inclusion/exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was carried out on selected studies using CMA software and HR as the pooled effect size metric. A total of 49 studies were included in the study. The pooled HR values of PLR, NLR and MLR indicated that they were significantly correlated with poorer OS. The pooled effect estimates for PLR, NLR and MLR were 1.461 (95% CI 1.329–1.674), 1.639 (95% CI 1.429–1.880) and 1.002 (95% CI 0.720–1.396), respectively. Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed in the meta-analysis of all three. The results of this study suggest that PLR, NLR and MLR ratios can be powerful prognostic markers in head and neck cancers that can guide treatment. Further evidence from large-scale clinical studies on patient cohorts are required before they can be incorporated as a part of the clinical method. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42019121008


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document