4.4 Article

Meta-analysis of differences in neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio between hypertensive and non-hypertensive individuals

Journal

BMC CARDIOVASCULAR DISORDERS
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03304-w

Keywords

Hypertension; Inflammation; Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; Dipper; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study systematically reviewed the evidence on the differences in neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels between individuals with hypertension and those with normal blood pressure, as well as between patients with dipper and non-dipper hypertension (HTN). A total of 21 studies were included, and it was found that hypertensive patients had significantly higher NLR levels compared to individuals with normal blood pressure (WMD = 0.40, 95%CI = 0.22-0.57, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, non-dipper patients had higher NLR levels compared to dipper patients (WMD = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.19-0.97, P = 0.003).
This study systematically reviewed the evidence regarding differences in the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) level between hypertensive and normotensive individuals as well as between patients with dipper and non-dipper hypertension (HTN). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to 20 December 2021. This was done without any limitation with regard to date, publication, or language. Pooled weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were reported. We assessed the quality of studies based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). In total, 21 studies were included in our study. There was a significant increase in NLR levels for the hypertensive group in comparison to the control group (WMD = 0.40, 95%CI = 0.22-0.57, P < 0.0001). In addition, the NLR levels were higher in the non-dipper than in the dipper group (WMD = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.19-0.97, P = 0.003). Our findings showed that hypertensive patients had higher level of NLR than normotensive individuals.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available