Study inclusion
The flow chart of the literature searched and included is showed in Fig. 1. After the initial keyword search, 126 articles were included, of which 39 repetitive studies were removed, and 50 irrelevant studies were excluded by reading titles and abstracts. The full text of the remaining 37 articles was read, and 5 abstracts, 3 reviews and 17 irrelevant studies were excluded. Finally, 12 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis [11, 12, 19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28].
Study characteristics
A total of 12 studies (n = 3641 patients) published between 2015 and 2020 were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All 12 studies used standardized intravenous thrombolytic therapy for AIS patients: rt-PA (0.9 mg/kg body weight, maximum 90 mg) was injected intravenously within 4.5 h after the onset of ischemic stroke, with 10 % of the total dose as a bolus and the rest by a 60-minute infusion. Blood samples were collected on admission (n = 5) [19, 21, 23, 27, 28], within 24 h after IVT (n = 3) [12, 24, 26], or at both times (n = 4) [11, 20, 22, 25]. HT (including symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and parenchymal hemorrhage), mRS at 3 months, and mortality were reported in 6, 10, and 4 articles, respectively. The best cutoff values of the NLR ranged from 2.2 to 10.59. Since all 12 studies were cohort studies, we used NOS for quality assessment, with a score ranging from 6 to 8 points. The basic characteristics and quality assessment of the 12 included studies are showed in Table 1.
Table 1 Basic characteristics and quality evaluation of the included studies Meta-analysis
Hemorrhagic transformation
Six studies reported the relationship between the NLR and HT after IVT [11, 12, 19, 22, 25, 27]. Higher NLRs were associated with an increased risk of HT (OR = 1.33, 95 % CI = 1.14–1.56, P < 0.001). Significant heterogeneity between studies was observed (I²=71.8 %, P < 0.001) (Fig. 2).
Functional outcome
Ten studies reported the association between the NLR and poor 3-month functional outcome (mRS ≥ 3) after IVT [11, 19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26, 28]. Higher NLRs were associated with a higher risk of poor 3-month functional outcome (OR = 1.64, 95 % CI = 1.38–1.94, P < 0.001), and significant heterogeneity between studies was found (I²=86.3 %, P < 0.001) (Fig. 3).
Mortality
Four studies showed the relationship between the NLR and 3-month mortality [19, 21, 22, 26]. There was no significant association between higher NLRs and a higher risk of 3-month mortality (OR = 1.14, 95 % CI = 0.97–1.35, P = 0.120). Moreover, significant heterogeneity between studies was observed (I²=81.0 %, P < 0.001) (Fig. 4).
Subgroup analysis
Subgroup analysis of HT suggested that the NLR at admission rather than the NLR after IVT was associated with an increased risk of HT (OR = 1.33, 95 % CI = 1.01–1.75, P = 0.039). A higher risk of HT was observed in the elderly group (OR = 1.32, 95 % CI = 1.11–1.57, P = 0.002) and in the studies excluding infection (OR = 1.64, 95 % CI = 1.14–2.35, P = 0.008). Interestingly, an onset-to-IVT time less than 3 h was associated with a higher risk of HT (OR = 1.32, 95 % CI = 1.11–1.57, P < 0.001). Regardless of the country, stroke severity and the type of HT, the relationship between the NLR and HT remained significant (Table 2).
Table 2 Subgroup analyses of the associations between NLR and poor prognosis in AIS patients treated with IVT In addition, subgroup analysis of poor 3-month functional outcomes suggested that the blood sample collection time, age, country, onset-to-IVT time, presence or absence of infection and type of OR had no significant influence on the overall results. Higher NLRs were associated with a higher risk of poor functional outcome in the studies with moderate stroke severity (NIHSS ≥ 8) (OR = 2.15, 95 % CI = 1.50–3.09, P < 0.001) (Table 2).
Publication bias and sensitivity analysis
The evidence of publication bias in the studies that reported HT and functional outcomes were detected by Egger’s test (P = 0.019 and P = 0.001, respectively). After the trim-and-fill test, the pooled ORs were 1.31 (0.99–1.72) and 1.42 (0.86–2.36), respectively (Table S1).
Sensitivity analysis showed that no studies affected the effects of the pooled OR, indicating that the results of this systematic review and meta-analysis were stable (Figure S1, S2).