4.7 Review

Acute Coronary Syndrome, Stroke, and Mortality after Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12072577

Keywords

pneumonia; acute coronary syndrome; myocardial infarction; stroke; systematic review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One-third of adult inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) develop acute coronary syndrome (ACS), stroke, heart failure (HF), arrhythmias, or die. The evidence linking CAP to cardiovascular disease (CVD) events is contradictory. We aimed to systematically review the role of CAP as a CVD risk factor.
One-third of adult inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) develop acute coronary syndrome (ACS), stroke, heart failure (HF), arrhythmias, or die. The evidence linking CAP to cardiovascular disease (CVD) events is contradictory. We aimed to systematically review the role of CAP as a CVD risk factor. We registered the protocol (CRD42022352910) and searched for six databases from inception to 31 December 2022. We included 13 observational studies, 276,109 participants, 18,298 first ACS events, 12,421 first stroke events, 119 arrhythmic events, 75 episodes of new onset or worsening HF, 3379 deaths, and 218 incident CVD events. CAP increased the odds of ACS (OR 3.02; 95% CI 1.88-4.86), stroke (OR 2.88; 95% CI 2.09-3.96), mortality (OR 3.22; 95% CI 2.42-4.27), and all CVD events (OR 3.37; 95% CI 2.51-4.53). Heterogeneity was significant (I-2 = 97%, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis found differences according to the continent of origin of the study, the follow-up length, and the sample size (I-2 > 40.0%, p < 0.10). CAP is a significant risk factor for all major CVD events including ACS, stroke, and mortality. However, these findings should be taken with caution due to the substantial heterogeneity and the possible publication bias.

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