Clinical significance of micrornas in patients with sepsis: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Daisuke Hasegawa, Kazuma Yamakawa, Kohei Taniguchi, Shuhei Murao, Osamu Nishida

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Sepsis is a dysregulated immune response that leads to organ dysfunction and has high mortality rates despite recent therapeutic advancements. Accurate diagnosis and risk stratification are important for effective sepsis treatment; however, no decisive diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers are currently available. To understand whether microRNA (miRNA) might be useful biomarkers of sepsis, we aim to assess the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of three miRNAs (122, 150, and 223) in sepsis patients via a meta-analysis of relevant published data. We will search electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for pertinent retrospective and prospective studies in October 2019. Two reviewers will evaluate the collected titles, abstracts, and full articles, and extract the data. We will assess the included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. If feasible, we will use bivariate random effects and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) models to estimate summary ROCs, pooled sensitivity and specificity values, and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. We will evaluate heterogeneity via clinical and methodological subgroup and sensitivity analyses. This systematic review will clarify the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of select miRNAs in sepsis. It may also identify knowledge gaps in sepsis' diagnosis and prognosis.

Original languageEnglish
Article numberdiagnostics9040211
JournalDiagnostics
Volume9
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-12-2019

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Clinical Biochemistry

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical significance of micrornas in patients with sepsis: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this