// Jing Zhang 1, * , Yanlin Song 2, * , Baoyin Shan 1, * , Min He 1 , Qingqing Ren 1 , Yunhui Zeng 1 , Zhiyong Liu 1 , Hao Liu 1 and Jianguo Xu 1 1 Department of Neurosurgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, PR China 2 West China School of Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, PR China * These authors have contributed equally to this work Correspondence to: Jianguo Xu, email: jianguo_1229@126.com Keywords: D-dimer; stroke; risk factor Received: August 05, 2017 Accepted: September 20, 2017 Published: December 18, 2017 ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the association between D-dimer level and the risk of stroke through performing a meta-analysis. PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for potentially eligible literature. Prospective observational studies or case-control studies were included. The study characteristics and relevant data were extracted. Hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled to estimate the association between D-dimer level and the risk of stroke. Seven prospective studies with 22,207 patients and three case-control studies with 2,248 patients were included. For the prospective studies, the pooled HRs of higher D-dimer level for all types of stroke, ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke were 1.55 (95% CI, 1.28-1.87), 1.62 (95% CI, 1.18-2.22) and 1.30 (95% CI, 0.63-2.68), respectively. The pooled HRs per SD increase in log D-dimer for all types of stroke, ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke were 1.16 (95% CI, 1.06-1.26), 1.11 (95% CI, 1.03-1.21) and 1.11 (95% CI, 0.95-1.30), respectively. For the case-control studies, the pooled OR of higher D-dimer level for acute ischemic stroke was 2.06 (95% CI, 1.08-3.96). No significant publication bias was found in the meta-analysis. In conclusion, our results suggested that higher D-dimer level was associated with higher risk of stroke, especially ischemic stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: