Key result
NT-proBNP reduction from beta blockers, sacubitril/valsartan, and iSGLT2 shows no link to improved 18-month prognosis.
Why the study?
A reduction of ≥30% in NT-proBNP after heart failure hospitalization is linked to better prognosis, but the factors associated with achieving this reduction warranted analysis.
What factors are associated with a ≥30% reduction in NT-proBNP after heart failure hospitalization, and does this reduction improve prognosis?
Observational (n=287)
No
What factors are associated with a ≥30% reduction in NT-proBNP after heart failure hospitalization, and does this reduction improve prognosis?
While guideline-directed medical therapies are associated with significant NT-proBNP reduction after HF hospitalization, this reduction did not translate to a statistically significant prognostic benefit in this specific cohort.
NT-proBNP reduction with GDMT was unlinked to prognosis; challenges prior associations and leaves open surrogate value in observational HF cohorts.
Introduction Natriuretic neurohormone peptides, B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal prohormone of BNP (NT-proBNP) are established biomarkers for clinical use, enabling the clinician to make a differential diagnosis of dyspnea, and also for risk stratification and prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF). A cutoff value of ≥30% reduction of NT-proBNP after HF hospitalization has been established in several studies, confering these patients a better prognosis than those with a <30% decrease. Purpose We aimed to analyse the factors and characteristics associated with a ≥30% reduction in the levels of NT-proBNP at discharge in a cohort of patients hospitalized for HF in our hospital. Methods This is a prospective, observational and analytical study including all consecutive patients hospitalized for HF at our hospital in whom the levels of NT-proBNP were measured. We compared two groups of patients, considering a cutoff value of 30% decrease in NT-proBNP levels in the first visit after discharge compared to admission, analyzing the factors associated with this significant reduction. The median follow up was 18 [10.5-30.5] months. Results Our sample was composed of 287 patients. There were no significant differences in NT-proBNP reduction associated with sex, cardiovascular risk factors nor chronic kidney disease. Aetiology wasn’t a determinant factor either, with a <30% decrease in NT-proBNP in dilated cardiomyopathy, ischaemic origin or other types of cardiomyopathies. Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, the need for vasoactive drugs or diuretic resistance weren’t associated with a ≥30% difference in NT-proBNP. There was, however, a significant difference in patients who were discharged on betablockers, sacubitril/valsartan and iSGLT2. As to echocardiographic findings, aortic stenosis was significantly associated with a <30% decrease in NT-proBNP, and patients with significant tricuspid regurgitation tended to have higher NT-proBNP at discharge. As to follow up, we didn’t find any significant differences in prognosis between both groups. However, there was a tendency towards more mortality in the <30% reduction in NT-proBNP group. Conclusions A 30% decrease in NT-proBNP during hospitalization has been a cutoff value that has been well stablished in several studies, associated with a better prognosis in HF. In our cohort some factors associated with this ≥30% reduction were beta blockers, sacubitril/valsartan and iSGLT2, while the presence of aortic stenosis was significantly associated with a <30% decrease. A ≥30% reduction at discharge compared to admission wasn’t associated with better prognosis in our cohort.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Montes et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Heart failure (n=287). ≥30% reduction in NT-proBNP levels vs. <30% reduction in NT-proBNP levels was evaluated on Prognosis (mortality). A ≥30% reduction in NT-proBNP at discharge compared to admission was not associated with better prognosis in patients hospitalized for heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: