Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34286064›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2021

Systematic review and Meta-Analysis of Mendelian randomisation analyses of Abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Muhammad Ibrahim, Shivshankar Thanigaimani, Tejas P Singh, Dylan Morris, Jonathan Golledge

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muhammad IbrahimThe Queensland Research Centre for Peripheral Vascular Disease (QRC-PVD), College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
Shivshankar ThanigaimaniThe Queensland Research Centre for Peripheral Vascular Disease (QRC-PVD), College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
Tejas P SinghThe Queensland Research Centre for Peripheral Vascular Disease (QRC-PVD), College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
Dylan MorrisThe Queensland Research Centre for Peripheral Vascular Disease (QRC-PVD), College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
Jonathan GolledgeThe Queensland Research Centre for Peripheral Vascular Disease (QRC-PVD), College of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
Townsville Hospital · AUAustralian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMendelian randomisation (MR) has been suggested to be able to overcome biases of observational studies, but no meta-analysis is available on MR studies on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). This systematic review and Meta-analysis examined the evidence of causal risk factors for AAA identified in MR studies.

methodsPublicly available databases were systematically searched for MR studies that reported any causal risk factors for AAA diagnosis. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models and reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Study quality was assessed using a modified version of Strengthening the Reporting of Mendelian Randomisation Studies (STROBE-MR) guidelines.

resultsSixteen MR studies involving 34,050 patients with AAA and 2,205,894 controls were included. Meta-analyses suggested that one standard deviation increase in high density lipoprotein (HDL) significantly reduced (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.72) and one standard deviation increase in low density lipoprotein (LDL) significantly increased the risk (OR: 1.68, 95%, CI: 1.55, 1.82) of AAA. One standard deviation increase in triglycerides did not significantly increase the risk of AAA (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.86, 1.71). Quality assessment suggested that ten and five studies were of low and moderate risk of bias respectively, with one study considered as high risk of bias.

conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests LDL and HDL are positive and negative casual risk factors for AAA.

Indexed as

Abdominal aortic aneurysmMendelian randomizationPeripheral artery disease

Identifiers

PMID34286064
PMCPMC8274287
OpenAlexW3182483370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.