Search

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) accounts for about 7 million deaths per year worldwide. The early identification of signs and symptoms and the detection of specific serological markers of this disease are mandatory to reach a prompt diagnosis and begin potentially life-saving treatment. Point-of-care technologies applied to salivary diagnostics can provide rapid, simple, low-cost, and accurate measurements of specific markers and can also be used in emergency settings. The present systematic review was developed to answer the following question: "Are salivary biomarkers useful in identifying patients with acute myocardial infarction?" Following the "Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis" (PRISMA) guidelines, we selected 17 papers. The critical appraisal and quality assessment were performed following the National Institute of Health and the classification of the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine. Twenty-six salivary biomarkers were explored in association with AMI. Troponins, C-reactive protein, and adiponectin were the most frequently investigated molecules. We found that the evaluated biomarkers had different levels of diagnostic accuracy in discriminating patients with AMI from healthy controls. We also observed a lack of good-quality studies on the association between the occurrence of AMI and the presence of related salivary biomarkers. There is evidence that salivary isoforms of cardiac troponin, C-reactive protein, and creatine phosphokinase (CPK) could be useful markers for the prompt diagnosis of AMI. However, the effective use of these markers as possible substitutes for serological markers should be confirmed by further studies that avoid the bias highlighted in the present review. • Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is the cause of 7.4 million deaths per year. • Biomarkers associated to AMI can be detected in saliva. • Salivary biomarkers can potentially distinguish between patients and healthy controls. • Troponins, C-reactive protein and creatine phosphokinases seem promising biomarkers. • Further studies are necessary, considering the risk of bias highlighted in the review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]