4.6 Article

Increased interleukin-18 level contributes to the development and severity of ischemic stroke

期刊

AGING-US
卷 11, 期 18, 页码 7457-7472

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.102253

关键词

interleukin-18; ischemic stroke; association; meta-analysis; cross-sectional study

资金

  1. Key Science & Technology Project of Shanghai [11411950300]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81230027]
  3. Shanghai Natural Science Foundation [13ZR1460500, 13ZR1409700, 15ZR1412900]
  4. Shanghai Jiaotong University Medical Engineering Foundation [YG2015MS52, YG2016MS48]
  5. Innovative research team of high-level local universities in Shanghai

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although interleukin-18 (IL-18) has been implicated in the pathophysiology of stroke, research findings concerning IL-18 level in stroke have been inconsistent. Thus, we performed a cross-sectional study in patients with first-episode ischemic stroke and then extracted relevant data from databases to validate our results. A total of 252 patients and 259 healthy subjects were recruited, and serum IL-18 level was evaluated in a cross-sectional study. Then, we extracted data and conducted a meta-analysis, including 2,928 patients and 3,739 controls to support our results. A 95% confidence interval for standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated using a Z test. We found IL-18 was higher in stroke patients than in controls (2.39 +/- 0.25 vs. 2.25 +/- 0.28, F=8.60, p=0.004) and was negatively associated with the NIHSS scale (r = -0.14, p=0.028). A subsequent meta-analysis confirmed that IL-18 level was higher in stroke patients than in controls (SMD = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.54 similar to 2.73, P< 0.001). IL-18 level increased with the severity of the stroke (p< 0.01). These findings revealed increased IL-18 level contributed to the development and severity of ischemic stroke, suggesting the potential of this biomarker to become an important reference for the early monitoring of ischemic stroke.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据