Kathrina Acapulco, Shayne Julieane L. Morales, Tzar Francis Verame
{"title":"Diagnostic Performance of Mean Platelet Volume in the Diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Kathrina Acapulco, Shayne Julieane L. Morales, Tzar Francis Verame","doi":"10.21141/pjp.2020.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of mean platelet volume for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction among adult patients with angina and/or its equivalents in terms of sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and likelihood ratios. Methodology. The primary search was done through search in electronic databases. Cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control articles studying the diagnostic performance of mean platelet volume in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in adult patients were included in the study. Eligible studies were appraised using well-defined criteria. Results. The overall mean MPV value of those with MI (9.702 fl; 95% CI 9.07 – 10.33) was higher than in those of the non-MI control group (8.85 fl; 95% CI 8.23 – 9.46). Interpretation of the calculated t-value of 2.0827 showed that there was a significant difference in the mean MPV values of those with MI and those of the non-MI controls. The summary sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) for MPV were 0.66 (95% CI; 0.59 - 0.73) and 0.60 (95% CI; 0.43 – 0.75), respectively. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 2.92 (95% CI; 1.90 – 4.50). The positive likelihood ratio of MPV in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 1.65 (95% CI; 1.20 – 22.27), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.56 (95% CI; 0.50 – 0.64). Conclusion. The intended role for MPV in the diagnostic pathway of myocardial infarction would perhaps be best as a triage tool. MPV values can discriminate between those who have MI and those without. For a patient with angina presenting with elevated MPV values, it is 1.65 times more likely that he has MI. It is implied that the decision to treat a patient with angina or its equivalents as a case of MI could be supported by an elevated MPV value.","PeriodicalId":166708,"journal":{"name":"Philippine Journal of Pathology","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philippine Journal of Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21141/pjp.2020.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of mean platelet volume for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction among adult patients with angina and/or its equivalents in terms of sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and likelihood ratios. Methodology. The primary search was done through search in electronic databases. Cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control articles studying the diagnostic performance of mean platelet volume in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in adult patients were included in the study. Eligible studies were appraised using well-defined criteria. Results. The overall mean MPV value of those with MI (9.702 fl; 95% CI 9.07 – 10.33) was higher than in those of the non-MI control group (8.85 fl; 95% CI 8.23 – 9.46). Interpretation of the calculated t-value of 2.0827 showed that there was a significant difference in the mean MPV values of those with MI and those of the non-MI controls. The summary sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) for MPV were 0.66 (95% CI; 0.59 - 0.73) and 0.60 (95% CI; 0.43 – 0.75), respectively. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 2.92 (95% CI; 1.90 – 4.50). The positive likelihood ratio of MPV in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 1.65 (95% CI; 1.20 – 22.27), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.56 (95% CI; 0.50 – 0.64). Conclusion. The intended role for MPV in the diagnostic pathway of myocardial infarction would perhaps be best as a triage tool. MPV values can discriminate between those who have MI and those without. For a patient with angina presenting with elevated MPV values, it is 1.65 times more likely that he has MI. It is implied that the decision to treat a patient with angina or its equivalents as a case of MI could be supported by an elevated MPV value.