The role of total cell-free DNA in predicting outcomes among trauma patients in the intensive care unit: a systematic review
Gögenur et al. Critical Care (2017) 21:14
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1578-9
RESEARCH
Open Access
The role of total cell-free DNA in
predicting outcomes among trauma
patients in the intensive care unit: a
systematic review
Mikail Gögenur*, Jakob Burcharth and Ismail Gögenur
Abstract
Background: Cell-free DNA has been proposed as a means of predicting complications among severely injured
patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess whether cell-free DNA was useful as a prognostic
biomarker for outcomes in trauma patients in the intensive care unit.
Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials and
reference lists of relevant articles for studies that assessed the prognostic value of cell-free DNA detection in trauma
patients in the intensive care unit. Outcomes of interest included survival, posttraumatic complications and severity
of trauma. Due to considerable heterogeneity between the included studies, a checklist was formed to assess
quality of cell-free DNA measurement.
Results: A total of 14 observational studies, including 904 patients, were eligible for analysis. Ten studies were
designed as prospective cohort studies; three studies included selected patients from a cohort while one study was
of a retrospective design. We found a significant correlation between higher values of cell-free DNA and higher
mortality. This significant correlation was evident as early as on intensive care unit admission. Likewise, cell-free
DNA predicted the severity of trauma and posttraumatic complications in a majority of patients.
Conclusion: The amount of cell-free DNA can function as a prognostic tool for mortality and to a lesser extent
severity of trauma and posttraumatic complications. Standardizing cell-free DNA measurement is paramount to
ensure further research in cell-free DNA as a prognostic tool.
Keywords: cfDNA, mtDNA, nDNA, Trauma, Intensive care unit
Background
In recent years cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has become increasingly used as a clinical and noninvasive biomarker in
the fields of cancer [1–3], pre-natal diagnostics [4], organ
transplantation [5], and in several emergency conditions
[6–8]. cfDNA, defined as extracellular DNA circulating
freely in the blood, can be further subcategorized to circulating mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and circulating
nuclear DNA (nDNA). Within cancer research, cfDNA
has been proposed to have the ability to act as a noninvasive biopsy of the tumor (i.e., liquid-biopsy) [9] and
* Correspondence:
Center for Surgical Science, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Zealand
University Hospital, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Køge, Denmark
as a prognostic marker for clinical outcomes such as
disease burden [3], progression-free survival [10], and
overall survival [11].
In patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) as
a result of trauma, cfDNA has received increasing attention under the hypothesis that cfDNA originates from
cell death [12, 13] and could correlate with the severity
of trauma with prognostic and predictive abilities. Preliminary reports have confirmed that the amount of cfDNA
correlates inversely to mortality [14], trauma severity [15],
and post-traumatic complications [16]. Due to the short
half-life of cfDNA [17], it is suitable as a marker of the patient’s condition in the immediate emergency phase.
mtDNA has also been increasingly investigated in
© The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Gögenur et al. Critical Care (2017) 21:14
trauma patients in recent years and it has been argued that mtDNA could be considered a damageassociated molecular pattern (DAMP). It is well established that circulating DAMPs lead to an increase in
the innate immune response [18], possible leading to
a systematic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS)
[19].
The use of cfDNA as a predictive marker of clinical
outcome have not been systematically analyzed. The aim
of this study was to review the literature on cfDNA as a
predictive marker of clinical outcomes as measured in
trauma patients in ICUs.
Methods
This systematic review was conducted according to the
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and
Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [20].
Eligibility criteria
The inclusion criteria for studies in this review were cohort human studies that investigated levels of cfDNA in
plasma or serum in trauma patients aged ≥18 years in
the ICU. Trauma was defined as all grades of trauma
ranging from minor to severe trauma, including isolated
traumatic brain injury (TBI) that resulted in ICU admission. Studies exclusively evaluating circulating RNA as
well as studies conducted outside the ICUs were excluded.
A thorough assessment of the quality of DNA sampling
and processing was conducted for all included studies
using previous definitions [21] (see Additional file 1). We
included studies that analyzed DNA by specific sequencing (beta-globin, GAPDH, NADH dehydrogenase) or
fluorescent methods. We only included published studies
and only studies published in the English language.
Study search
A computerized comprehensive search strategy was conducted using four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS,
and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials)
from January 1974 to January 2016. The search was performed on 20 January 2016. The following literature search
was used in PubMed: “(circulating cell free dna) OR cfdna)
OR circulating nucleic acids) OR cell free mitochondrial
DNA) OR nDNA) AND (injury) OR trauma) OR stress)
OR surgery) OR intensive care unit) OR perioperative) OR
postoperative) OR intraoperative) OR preoperative)”.
The literature search was adapted from the PubMed literature search to EMBASE, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane
Central Register for Controlled Trials. We supplemented
the structured literature search with searching of the reference lists from the included articles in order to find additional eligible studies.
Page 2 of 10
Study selection
The Cochrane systematic review tool Covidence.org was
used in the screening process. Two reviewers (MG and
JB) independently screened titles and abstracts until the
full-text articles were found. Two authors (MG and JB)
independently assessed the full-text articles. Whenever
different opinions emerged a third author (IG) was included in the discussion until consensus was reached.
Data collection and data items
All included articles were assessed for the following informati (...truncated)