Search

Aims: Obese patients have lower natriuretic peptide concentrations. We hypothesized that adjusting the concentration of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) for obesity could further increase its clinical utility in the early diagnosis of acute heart failure (AHF)., Methods and Results: This hypothesis was tested in a prospective diagnostic study enrolling unselected patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnoea. Two independent cardiologists/internists centrally adjudicated the final diagnosis using all individual patient information including cardiac imaging. NT-proBNP plasma concentrations were applied: first, using currently recommended cut-offs; second, using cut-offs lowered by 33% with body mass index (BMI) of 30-34.9 kg/m 2 and by 50% with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m 2 . Among 2038 patients, 509 (25%) were obese, of which 271 (53%) had AHF. The diagnostic accuracy of NT-proBNP as quantified by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was lower in obese versus non-obese patients (0.890 vs. 0.938). For rapid AHF rule-out in obese patients, the currently recommended cut-off of 300 pg/ml achieved a sensitivity of 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 93.8-98.2%), ruling out 29% of patients and missing 9 AHF patients. For rapid AHF rule-in, the age-dependent cut-off concentrations (age <50 years: 450 pg/ml; age 50-75 years: 900 pg/ml; age >75 years: 1800 pg/ml) achieved a specificity of 84.9% (95% CI 79.8-88.9%). Proportionally lowering the currently recommended cut-offs by BMI increased sensitivity to 98.2% (95% CI 95.8-99.2%), missing 5 AHF patients; reduced the proportion of AHF patients remaining in the 'gray zone' (48% vs. 26%; p = 0.002), achieving a specificity of 76.5% (95% CI 70.7-81.4%)., Conclusions: Adjusting NT-proBNP concentrations for obesity seems to further increase its clinical utility in the early diagnosis of AHF., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) thresholds for acute heart failure and to develop and validate a decision support tool that combines NT-proBNP concentrations with clinical characteristics., Design: Individual patient level data meta-analysis and modelling study., Setting: Fourteen studies from 13 countries, including randomised controlled trials and prospective observational studies., Participants: Individual patient level data for 10 369 patients with suspected acute heart failure were pooled for the meta-analysis to evaluate NT-proBNP thresholds. A decision support tool (Collaboration for the Diagnosis and Evaluation of Heart Failure (CoDE-HF)) that combines NT-proBNP with clinical variables to report the probability of acute heart failure for an individual patient was developed and validated., Main Outcome Measure: Adjudicated diagnosis of acute heart failure., Results: Overall, 43.9% (4549/10 369) of patients had an adjudicated diagnosis of acute heart failure (73.3% (2286/3119) and 29.0% (1802/6208) in those with and without previous heart failure, respectively). The negative predictive value of the guideline recommended rule-out threshold of 300 pg/mL was 94.6% (95% confidence interval 91.9% to 96.4%); despite use of age specific rule-in thresholds, the positive predictive value varied at 61.0% (55.3% to 66.4%), 73.5% (62.3% to 82.3%), and 80.2% (70.9% to 87.1%), in patients aged <50 years, 50-75 years, and >75 years, respectively. Performance varied in most subgroups, particularly patients with obesity, renal impairment, or previous heart failure. CoDE-HF was well calibrated, with excellent discrimination in patients with and without previous heart failure (area under the receiver operator curve 0.846 (0.830 to 0.862) and 0.925 (0.919 to 0.932) and Brier scores of 0.130 and 0.099, respectively). In patients without previous heart failure, the diagnostic performance was consistent across all subgroups, with 40.3% (2502/6208) identified at low probability (negative predictive value of 98.6%, 97.8% to 99.1%) and 28.0% (1737/6208) at high probability (positive predictive value of 75.0%, 65.7% to 82.5%) of having acute heart failure., Conclusions: In an international, collaborative evaluation of the diagnostic performance of NT-proBNP, guideline recommended thresholds to diagnose acute heart failure varied substantially in important patient subgroups. The CoDE-HF decision support tool incorporating NT-proBNP as a continuous measure and other clinical variables provides a more consistent, accurate, and individualised approach., Study Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019159407., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the British Heart Foundation, Medical Research Council, and Chief Scientist Office; Y-EC has received honorariums for lectures and presentations from Biomérieux, Roche Diagnostics, and Thermo Fisher; CdF has received consulting fees from Fuji Rebio, Ortho Diagnostics, Quidel, and Roche Diagnostics and a patent entitled “Methods for assessing differential risk for developing heart failure” (patent number: PCT/US2015/029838); SS has received a grant from Roche Diagnostics and a patent entitled “Methods for assessing differential risk for developing heart failure” (patent number: PCT/US2015/029838); ABG has received personal fees and non-financial support from Roche Diagnostics during the conduct of the study and personal fees from Abbott and AstraZeneca, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, and personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis and Vifor outside the submitted work. YP has received consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics, Pfizer, and Forbion and honorariums from CVOI and Daiichi Sankyo; HKG has received grants from Roche Diagnostics, Jana Care, Ortho Clinical, Novartis, Pfizer, Alnylam, and Akcea (IONIS), consulting fees from Amgen, Eko, Merck, and Pfizer, and stock in Eko; JCW works as a biostatistician at the biotech company BRAHMS GmbH, part of Thermo Fisher Scientific; MM has received grants from Health Care Research Projects and Biomarker Research and personal fees from Consulting outside the submitted work; ASVS has received speaker fees from Abbott Diagnostics outside the submitted work; AMR has received grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Roche Diagnostics outside the submitted work; JJVM has received consulting fees from Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Cardurion, Dal-Cor, GSK, Ionis, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, Pfizer, and Theracos, payments for advisory boards, symposiums, or lectures from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Eris Lifesciences, Hikma, Lupin, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier, and the Corpus, has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Cardialysis (MONITOR study) and Merck (VICTORIA trial), and works as company director for Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd (GCTP) outside the submitted work; CM has received grants and non-financial support from several diagnostic companies during the conduct of the study and grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from several diagnostic companies outside the submitted work; JJ has received grants from Abbott Diagnostics, Innolife, and Novartis and consulting fees from Abbott, Jana Care, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Prevencio; NLM has received grants from Siemens Healthineers, consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics and LumiraDx, and speaker fees from Abbott Diagnostics and Siemens Healthineers outside the submitted work; KKL, DD, and NLM are employed by the University of Edinburgh, which has filed a patent on the CoDE-HF score (patent reference: PCT/GB2021/051470); no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: High-sensitivity troponin T (hs-TnT) reflects the severity of ongoing myocardial damage. In acute heart failure (AHF), its additive prognostic value over B-type natriuretic peptides is unclear., Methods: Individual data of 1499 AHF patients with admission hs-TnT were collected from 3 cohorts., Results: Patients (78 ± 10 years, 51% men, N-terminal fragment of pro-B-type natriuretic peptide - NT-proBNP - 5660 [2693-12,466], hs-TnT 43 ng/L [26-69]) experiencing in-hospital death (n = 187, 13%) had significantly higher hs-TnT and NT-proBNP on admission (both p < 0.001). Patients with hs-TnT ≥43 ng/L and NT-proBNP ≥5660 ng/L had a 2.7-fold higher risk of in-hospital death (relative risk - RR 2.7, 95% confidence interval - CI 1.7-4.5). Among discharged patients, 1024 deaths (81%) occurred over 11 months (4-22). In the whole population, hs-TnT ≥43 ng/L predicted all-cause death at 6, 12 and 24 months independently from NT-proBNP ≥5660 ng/L. The best NT-proBNP cut-off for in-hospital mortality (4382 ng/L) independently predicted this endpoint, while the best hs-TnT cut-off (55 ng/L) did not. Patients with NT-proBNP ≥4382 ng/L and hs-TnT ≥55 ng/L had a 12-fold higher risk of in-hospital death (RR 11.7, 95% CI 6.9-19.7). The best hs-TnT cut-offs independently predicted all post-discharge outcomes., Conclusions: The best NT-proBNP cut-off (4382 ng/L) independently predicts outcome, while the best hs-TnT (55 ng/L) does not; patients with both biomarkers ≥best cut-offs have a 12-fold higher risk of in-hospital mortality. Admission hs-TnT ≥43 ng/L and the best hs-TnT cut-offs hold independent prognostic significance for post-discharge outcome, while hs-TnT seems less predictive than NT-proBNP when considering absolute values., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Natriuretic peptide [NP; B-type NP (BNP), N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP), and midregional proANP (MR-proANP)] concentrations are quantitative plasma biomarkers for the presence and severity of haemodynamic cardiac stress and heart failure (HF). End-diastolic wall stress, intracardiac filling pressures, and intracardiac volumes seem to be the dominant triggers. This paper details the most important indications for NPs and highlights 11 key principles underlying their clinical use shown below. NPs should always be used in conjunction with all other clinical information. NPs are reasonable surrogates for intracardiac volumes and filling pressures. NPs should be measured in all patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of HF such as dyspnoea and/or fatigue, as their use facilitates the early diagnosis and risk stratification of HF. NPs have very high diagnostic accuracy in discriminating HF from other causes of dyspnoea: the higher the NP, the higher the likelihood that dyspnoea is caused by HF. Optimal NP cut-off concentrations for the diagnosis of acute HF (very high filling pressures) in patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnoea are higher compared with those used in the diagnosis of chronic HF in patients with dyspnoea on exertion (mild increase in filling pressures at rest). Obese patients have lower NP concentrations, mandating the use of lower cut-off concentrations (about 50% lower). In stable HF patients, but also in patients with other cardiac disorders such as myocardial infarction, valvular heart disease, atrial fibrillation or pulmonary embolism, NP concentrations have high prognostic accuracy for death and HF hospitalization. Screening with NPs for the early detection of relevant cardiac disease including left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with cardiovascular risk factors may help to identify patients at increased risk, therefore allowing targeted preventive measures to prevent HF. BNP, NT-proBNP and MR-proANP have comparable diagnostic and prognostic accuracy. In patients with shock, NPs cannot be used to identify cause (e.g. cardiogenic vs. septic shock), but remain prognostic. NPs cannot identify the underlying cause of HF and, therefore, if elevated, must always be used in conjunction with cardiac imaging., (© 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2019 European Society of Cardiology.)