Background
Coronary heart disease (CHD) is one of the largest causes of death and disease burden worldwide [
1,
2]. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a severe category of CHD associated with a high morbidity and mortality. ACS includes unstable angina (UA), ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Previous studies indicate that approximately half of deaths from CHD occur after ACS [
3,
4]. Rupture of atherosclerotic plaques and formation of thrombi are the main cause of ACS [
5‐
7]. The atherosclerotic plaques are associated with the infiltration of inflammatory cells (lymphocytes, monocytes, and neutrophils) [
8‐
10]. Inflammation plays a critical role in initiation, progression, and rupture of atherosclerotic plaque in ACS patients [
9,
10].
Markers of inflammation are associated with the prognosis of patients with ACS. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been established as a valuable predictor of the prognosis of ACS [
11‐
13]. Compared with neutrophils, monocytes play a more important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerotic disease [
14]. The role of monocyte infiltration of the arterial wall in the development of atherosclerotic plaques is well recognized [
15]. In addition, previous studies have showed that monocytes are associated with the onset of myocardial infarction (MI) and left ventricular remodeling [
16,
17].
In recent years, a growing body of research has focused on the relationship between lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratios (LMR) and mortality or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients with ACS. However, the conclusions of these studies are controversial. For example, Gijsberts et al. indicated that LMR significantly improved prediction of mortality [
18]. In the latter study, Kristono et al. found that LMR is not enough to be used for prediction in a clinical setting [
19]. Herein, we performed this meta-analysis to explore the predictive value of LMR in ACS patients.
Methods
This meta-analysis was performed followed the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We registered this meta-analysis in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019131296).
Search strategy
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of science. We used the following terms to search literature: “STEMI”,“UA”, “NSTEMI”, “lymphocyte to monocyte ratio”, “lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio”, “lymphocyte/monocyte ratio”, “monocyte/lymphocyte ratio”, “mortality”, “MACE” and “major adverse cardiac events”. The latest update was performed in April 15, 2020. We also screened the reference lists of all retrieved articles to identify other potentially relevant literature.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Studies were included if they met all the following criteria: (1) articles were published as full-text in English; (2) patients with ACS (STEMI, UA, NSTEMI); (3) LMR (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) was available; (4) the outcomes were associated with mortality or MACE. Articles were excluded if they met any of the following characteristics: (1) nonhuman studies; (2) duplicate studies; (3) absence of LMR or mortality/MACE. Two investigators (Xiao-Qing Quan and Run-Chang Wang) read the literature independently of each other. Disagreements solved by discussion with other investigators.
Data extraction and quality assessment
The following data were extracted: the first author, the country of patients, duration, the mean age, sample size of patients, LMR cut-off value, diseases of patients, HRs and 95% CIs and outcomes. The outcomes of studies included mortality (all-cause mortality) and MACE (including stroke/transient ischemic attack, target vessel revascularization, non-fatal MI, and cardiac death). The methodological quality of each study was evaluated with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) system [
20]. The maximum score is 9 and the study with a NOS score ≥ 6 was considered as a high-quality study.
Statistical analysis
All statistical analyses in the present study were conducted with STATA statistical software (version 13.1, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). We synthesized the HR and corresponding 95% CI to analysis of the relationship between LMR and mortality/MACCE. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane’s Q and I2 texts. I2 < 25% was regarded as low levels of heterogeneity. I2 value of 25 to 50% was regarded as moderate levels of heterogeneity. I2 > 50% was regarded as high levels of heterogeneity. A fixed-effects model was applied in the absence of significant heterogeneity (I2 ≤ 50%), or the random effect model was applied (I2 > 50%).
Discussion
ACS has a high morbidity and remains one of the major causes of mortality in the world [
3,
4]. Previous studies have suggested that LMR may be associated with the prognosis of ACS patients [
21‐
23,
25,
26]. Here we performed this meta-analysis to analyze the relationship between LMR and the prognosis of ACS patients. The aggregated results showed that a lower LMR might predict a higher mortality/MACE in patients with ACS.
In this meta-analysis, we enrolled 5 studies comprising 4343 patients to investigate the prognostic value of the LMR in patients with ACS [
18,
21‐
24]. The present study showed that LMR might be a predictor for short-term mortality/MACE. However, only two studies examined the effect of LMR on short-term mortality/MACE. More related studies are needed to explore the predictive value of low LMR for short-term mortality.
Results from the present study suggested that lower LMR was associated with higher long-term mortality/MACE in patients with ACS. Because there was a moderate level of heterogeneity among studies, we conducted subgroup analysis to further analyze the results. In all subgroups, LMR still had predictive value for poor prognosis, which indicated that the results were relatively reliable. Meanwhile, we found that mean age and defined cut-off value might be the sources of heterogeneity. We hypothesized that older ACS patients had more complex factors affecting the prognosis, such as immune status and nutritional status, leading to higher inter-study heterogeneity. And higher cut-off value had worse predictive value for poor prognosis. This might be the reason that heterogeneity occurred among studies with higher cut-off value. Our results also showed that low LMR was valuable for predicting poor prognosis in STEMI and NSTEMI patients, which was consistent with previous researches [
21‐
24].
ACS is related to atherosclerosis, which is accompanied by the infiltration of inflammatory cells [
8‐
10]. Lymphocytes and monocytes are pivotal immune cells and play an important role in inflammatory response and atherosclerosis development [
27,
28]. Previous studies indicated that decreased lymphocytes and increased monocytes might be related to the poor prognosis of the MI patients [
29‐
31].. Lymphocytes might be driven by recognition of cardiac auto antigens, became activated after MI, and facilitated the healing of the myocardium [
29]. MI could activate adrenergic signaling and trigger the production of monocytes. Excessive mononuclear growth might impair myocardial healing and exacerbate cardiovascular complications [
30,
31]. The above results indicated that lymphocyte and monocyte might be related to the prognosis of the MI patients.
Our studies had some limitations. Firstly, we did subgroup analysis and identified possible sources of heterogeneity. We could not accurately locate heterogeneity because of the subgroup analysis was observational. Secondly, only five studies were included in the meta-analysis, potentially leading to heterogeneity and less persuasive. Thirdly, all the enrolled studies were observational researchers. Compared with experimental studies, observational studies are more likely to have the risk of bias, which also relatively influence the accuracy of the study.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis addressing the relationship between LMR and the mortality/MACE in patients with ACS. This meta-analysis showed that LMR could be a valuable predictor in predicting mortality/MACE in patients with ACS. What’s more, in many primary hospitals, routine blood is the most rapid and basic detection methods which can immediately determine the patient’s condition. LMR might be used as an inexpensive and useful marker in assessment of patients with ACS.
Conclusions
In summary, this meta-analysis showed that a low LMR value might be effective in predicting the risk of short-term and long-term mortality/MACE in patients with ACS. Especially for younger ACS patients, a low LMR value might be more effective in predicting poor prognosis. But additional research was required to verify its effectiveness.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.