International journal of dermatology · 2016
Lichen planus and dyslipidemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lai Yi C, Yew Yik W, Schwartz Robert A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic inflammatory disease that has been shown to be positively associated with dyslipidemia. However, the magnitude and types of the underlying lipid abnormalities have not been investigated. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the qualitative and quantitative association between LP and dyslipidemia.
METHODS: A systematic search of studies published from inception to April 1, 2015, was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases. Meta-analyses of observational studies with both categorical and continuous outcome were performed. DerSimonian and Lard random effects models were utilized to calculate the pooled odds ratio and weighted mean difference (WMD). Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot and Egger's test.
RESULTS: Seven studies with 5242 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Patients with LP were significantly more likely to have dyslipidemia, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-2.54, P = 0.004). LP was associated with higher levels of triglycerides (WMD 83.37 mg/dl, 95% CI 0.62-166.12, P = 0.048), low-density lipoprotein (18.75 mg/dl, 95% CI -17.21 to 54.72, P = 0.307), total cholesterol (19.22 mg/dl, 95% CI -8.80 to 47.25, P = 0.179), and lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-8.96 mg/dl, 95% CI -21.22 to 3.30, P = 0.152).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable heterogeneity, this study demonstrated that LP was significantly associated with an increased risk of dyslipidemia and higher triglyceride levels. For patients presenting with LP, physicians should be cognizant of this association and consider screening them for dyslipidemia.
METHODS: A systematic search of studies published from inception to April 1, 2015, was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases. Meta-analyses of observational studies with both categorical and continuous outcome were performed. DerSimonian and Lard random effects models were utilized to calculate the pooled odds ratio and weighted mean difference (WMD). Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot and Egger's test.
RESULTS: Seven studies with 5242 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Patients with LP were significantly more likely to have dyslipidemia, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-2.54, P = 0.004). LP was associated with higher levels of triglycerides (WMD 83.37 mg/dl, 95% CI 0.62-166.12, P = 0.048), low-density lipoprotein (18.75 mg/dl, 95% CI -17.21 to 54.72, P = 0.307), total cholesterol (19.22 mg/dl, 95% CI -8.80 to 47.25, P = 0.179), and lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-8.96 mg/dl, 95% CI -21.22 to 3.30, P = 0.152).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable heterogeneity, this study demonstrated that LP was significantly associated with an increased risk of dyslipidemia and higher triglyceride levels. For patients presenting with LP, physicians should be cognizant of this association and consider screening them for dyslipidemia.