SynthesisPloS one2025
Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a potential biomarker in predicting in-stent restenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Beyond Angiography: Integrating Advanced Diagnostic Modalities in Coronary Stent Restenosis-a Systematic Review.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Development of a Risk Stratification Model for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis Based on Clinical, Laboratory, and Procedural Factors: A Case-Control Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Inflammatory Prognostic Index: A Novel Predictor of In-Stent Restenosis Following Drug-Eluting Stent-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Risk-stratified surveillance after LEEP: a nomogram integrating HPV persistence, margin status, and clinical factors to predict CIN2+ recurrence.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a significant challenge despite advancements in percutaneous interventions, often leading to adverse clinical outcomes. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has emerged as a potential biomarker for predicting ISR, offering opportunities for improved risk stratification and treatment personalization. This systematic review and meta-analysis assess the predictive value of NLR in ISR, providing insights into its clinical applicability.
methodsSystematic literature search was conducted in scientific databases until 21st July 2024. Observational studies evaluating NLR in stented patients were included. Random effect meta-analysis and linear regression model were used to investigate odds ratios (OR) as predictor and linear dose-response relationship of ISR. Sensitivity and specificity of NLR to predict this outcome were pooled and a summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) curve was generated. This study was already registered in the PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024555123).
results15 studies with 3 889 patients were included. High NLR was associated with increased risk of ISR in coronary and non-coronary stenting [aOR = 1.61 (95%CI 1.14-2.25); aOR = 1.69 (95%CI 1.52-1.87)]. One unit increase of NLR is equal to 30% and 44% increased risk of ISR in coronary and non-coronary patients. Included studies showing NLR as a robust predictor of ISR with sensitivity and specificity of 70.5% (95%CI 60.1%-79.2%) and 74.1% (95%CI 56.7%-86.2%) for coronary stenting and 77.7% (95%CI 69.8%-84.0%) and 66.4% (95%CI 49.6%-79.8%) non-coronary stenting, with AUC of 0.77 (0.70-0.82) in the coronary and 0.79 (0.70-0.85) in the non-coronary sub-groups.
conclusionIn conclusion, NLR yields promising predictive and prognostic potentials in predicting ISR in coronary and non-coronary stents. Additionally, NLR appears to be more proficient in predicting early ISR compared to late ISR in both coronary and non-coronary stents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.