Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026
Characterization of a Novel Human Organotypic Retinal Culture Technique
Published on: June 9, 2021
Exploring leukocyte differential count ratio profiles as inflammatory biomarkers in diabetic retinopathy: a
Ohisa Harley1,2, Yufilia Suci Amelia3, Elsa Gustianty3,4,5
1Doctoral Program in Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Padjadjaran University, Terusan Ekologi- No 7, Ir. Soekarno Street Km 21, Jatinangor, Bandung, West Java, 45363, Indonesia. ohisa23001@mail.unpad.ac.id.
Background:
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is increasingly prevalent and a major cause of irreversible blindness, particularly in developing countries. Limited access to ophthalmologists often leads to delayed diagnosis, emphasizing the need for more affordable and widely accessible screening methods to facilitate early identification. Recently, several studies have demonstrated variability in findings regarding the relationship between leukocyte differential count ratio biomarkers and DR. This study aims to investigate the association between leukocyte differential count ratios-NLR (Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), PLR (Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), MLR (Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), and SII (Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index)-and the stages of diabetic retinopathy (DR).
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across several databases up to September 2024, with a focus on identifying studies examining the relationship between the leukocyte differential count ratio profiles and diabetic retinopathy. Review Manager was used to conduct the meta-analyses. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to assess the included studies.
Results:
A total of 38 studies were included in the systematic review and 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The mean differences in the NLR and PLR values were significantly different among the groups and were higher in the PDR group (0.68 (95%CI 0.42-0.95, p < 0.05) and 19.57 (95%CI 10.68-28.46, p < 0.05; respectively). These findings were followed by significant differences in SII value 202.53 (95% CI 196.19-208.86, p < 0.05). Moreover, the MLR values were not significantly different among the groups (p > 0.05).
Conclusion:
NLR, PLR, and SII are associated with both the presence and progression of DR, with increasing levels of NLR and PLR reflecting a higher risk and severity of the disease. However, it is still necessary to justify the need to combine them with other clinical parameters to confirm the diagnosis.
