Diagnostic and prognostic value of serum C-reactive protein in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ishan Lakhani, Michelle Vangi Wong, Joshua Kai Fung Hung, Mengqi Gong, Khalid Bin Waleed, Yunlong Xia, Sharen Lee, Leonardo Roever, Tong Liu, Gary Tse, Keith Sai Kit Leung*, Ka Hou Christien Li

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a major epidemic with rising morbidity and mortality rates that encumber global healthcare systems. While some studies have demonstrated the value of CRP in predicting (i) the development of HFpEF and (ii) long-term clinical outcomes in HFpEF patients, others have shown no such correlation. As a result, we conducted the following systematic review and meta-analysis to assess both the diagnostic and prognostic role of CRP in HFpEF. PubMed and Embase were searched for studies that assess the relationship between CRP and HFpEF using the following search terms: (((C-reactive protein) AND ((preserved ejection fraction) OR (diastolic heart failure))). The search period was from the start of database to August 6, 2019, with no language restrictions. A total of 312 and 233 studies were obtained from PubMed and Embase respectively, from which 19 studies were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrated the value of a high CRP in predicting the development of not only new onset HFpEF (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.00–1.16; P = 0.04; I 2 = 22%), but also an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality when used as a categorical (HR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.61–3.96; P < 0.0001; I 2 = 19%) or a continuous variable (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.04–1.47; P = 0.01; I 2 = 28%), as well as all-cause mortality when used as a categorical (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.53–2.06; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%) or a continuous variable: (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.02–1.06; P = 0.003; I 2 = 61%) in HFpEF patients. CRP can be used as a biomarker to predict the development of HFpEF and long-term clinical outcomes in HFpEF patients, in turn justifying its use as a simple, accessible parameter to guide clinical management in this patient population. However, more prospective studies are still required to not only explore the utility and dynamicity of CRP in HFpEF but also to determine whether risk stratification algorithms incorporating CRP actually provide a material benefit in improving patient prognosis.

Original languageEnglish
JournalHeart Failure Reviews
Early online date6 Feb 2020
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 6 Feb 2020

Bibliographical note

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Keywords

  • C-reactive protein
  • Diastolic heart failure
  • HFpEF
  • Meta-analysis

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnostic and prognostic value of serum C-reactive protein in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Lakhani, I., Wong, M. V., Hung, J. K. F., Gong, M., Waleed, K. B., Xia, Y., Lee, S., Roever, L., Liu, T., Tse, G., Leung, K. S. K., & Li, K. H. C. (2020). Diagnostic and prognostic value of serum C-reactive protein in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart Failure Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-020-09927-x