4.7 Review

Serum Albumin Concentrations in Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10020269

关键词

COPD; albumin; inflammation; oxidative stress; malnutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that serum albumin concentrations are significantly lower in patients with stable COPD compared to non-COPD controls, indicating a deficiency in systemic anti-inflammatory and antioxidant defense mechanisms in COPD.
Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive condition characterized by chronic airway inflammation and lung parenchyma damage. Systemic inflammation and oxidative stress also play a role in the pathogenesis of COPD. Serum albumin is a negative acute-phase protein with antioxidant effects and an important marker of malnutrition. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate differences in serum albumin concentrations between patients with stable COPD and non-COPD subjects. Methods: A systematic search was conducted, using the terms albumin and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD, in the electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science, from inception to May 2020. Results: Twenty-six studies were identified on a total of 2554 COPD patients and 2055 non-COPD controls. Pooled results showed that serum albumin concentrations were significantly lower in COPD patients (standard mean difference, SMD = -0.50, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.32; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in SMD of serum albumin concentrations between COPD patients with forced expiratory volume in the 1st second (FEV1) < 50% and those with FEV1 > 50%. Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that serum albumin concentrations are significantly lower in patients with stable COPD compared to non-COPD controls. This supports the presence of a deficit in systemic anti-inflammatory and antioxidant defense mechanisms in COPD.

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

4.7
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