4.7 Review

The Role of Biomarkers in Atherothrombotic Stroke-A Systematic Review

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22169032

Keywords

stroke; biomarkers; atherothrombotic; atherosclerosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Atherosclerosis is the main cause of stroke, and biomarkers play an important role in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of stroke. Biomarkers have predictive capabilities for short-term and long-term prognosis for stroke patients, as well as influence over acute phase treatment, especially for risk stratification in patients who have not yet suffered a stroke.
Stroke represents the primary debilitating disease in adults and is the second-highest cause of death worldwide. Atherosclerosis, the most prevalent etiology for vascular conditions, is a continuous process that gradually creates and develops endothelial lesions known as atherosclerotic plaques. These lesions lead to the appearance of atherothrombotic stroke. In the last decades, the role of biological biomarkers has emerged as either diagnostic, prognostic, or therapeutic targets. This article aims to create a list of potential biomarkers related to atherothrombotic stroke by reviewing the currently available literature. We identified 23 biomarkers and assessed their roles as risk factors, detection markers, prognostic predictors, and therapeutic targets. The central aspect of these biomarkers is related to risk stratification, especially for patients who have not yet suffered a stroke. Other valuable data are focused on the predictive capabilities for stroke patients regarding short-term and long-term prognosis, including their influence over the acute phase treatment, such as rt-PA thrombolysis. Although the role of biomarkers is anticipated to be of extreme value in the future, they cannot yet compete with traditional stroke neuroimaging markers but could be used as additional tools for etiological diagnosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available