Table 2 Clinical characteristics of studies investigating no-reflow phenomenon included in the systematic review
Author/ year | Na | Age (years) | Women (%) | Study design | Events | D-dimer levels | Odds Ratio | Low CI | High CI | Main findings | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No-reflow group | Control group | ||||||||||
Gong 2020 [47] | 229 | 63.7 | 17 | R | 28 | 1600 ± 1400 ng/mL | 500 ± 600 ng/mL | 2.520 | 1.160 | 5.470 | D-dimer level can independently predict no-reflow after PCI. D-dimer value of 530 ng/mL was an effective cut-off point for postprocedural no-reflow with 85.7% of sensitivity and 67.7% of specificity (AUC = 0.78; p = 0.049). |
Huang 2020 [18] | 1165 | 63.5 | 17 | R | 165 | ≥ 800 ng/mL | < 800 ng/mL | 1.399 | 0.929 | 2.106 | D-dimer group had more frequently no-reflow (13.1% vs. 18.8%. p = 0.028). |
Cheng 2019 [48] | 218 | 58.7 | 17.5 | R | 39 | 410.3 ± 237.2 ng/mL | 536.9 ± 291.7 ng/mL | 1.001 | 1.000 | 1.003 | No-reflow patients were older, diabetics, with longer pain-to balloon time, lower blood pressure, higher platelet count and higher levels of D-dimer and Cystatin C. |
Zhang 2018 [22] | 926 | 52.6 | 53.7 | P | 435 | 508.5 ± 254.7 ng/mL | 272.0 ± 218.9 ng/mL | 2.563 | 1.910 | 3.439 | Multivariate OR for predicting no-reflow for D-dimer above mean (383.1 ng/mL). |
Gao 2018 [23] | 822 | 62.5 | 46.1 | P | 418 | 533.0 ± 244.0 ng/mL | 323.4 ± 224.4 ng/mL | 4.212 | 2.973 | 5.967 | Diabetic patients with high D-dimer levels showed higher risk of no-reflow. Sensitivity of high plasma D-dimer levels in predicting no-reflow was 0.766. |
Sarli 2015 [25] | 266 | 64 | 38 | P | 63 | 686 ± 236 μg/l | 418 ± 164 μg/l | 1.005 | 1.003 | 1.007 | D-dimer levels predicted no-reflow (OR: 1.005; 95% CI: 1.003–1.007; p < 0.001). Optimal cut-off for no-reflow was 549 μg/l. |
Erkol 2014 [15] | 569 | 56 | 16 | A | 179 | 720 (280–1490) mg/L | 350 (170–620) mg/L | 1.640 | 1.260 | 2.140 | D-dimer (per each 1 mg/L increase) predictor of angiographic no-reflow (p < 0.001). |