Key result
Meeting pre-discharge NT-proBNP targets is linked to ~65% lower 6-month mortality in ADHF.
Why the study?
Do relative NT-proBNP reduction targets provide more consistent mortality risk reduction predictions compared to absolute targets in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Cohort (n=1,266)
Yes
Do relative NT-proBNP reduction targets provide more consistent mortality risk reduction predictions compared to absolute targets in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Relative pre-discharge NT-proBNP reduction targets may be more consistently applicable across the spectrum of ADHF patients compared to single absolute targets.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support relative NT-proBNP targets for consistent ADHF risk stratification; leaves open superiority to absolute targets in trials.
AIMS: NT-proBNP is a strong predictor for readmissions and mortality in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients. We assessed whether absolute or relative NT-proBNP levels should be used as pre discharge treatment target. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our study population was assembled from seven ADHF cohorts. We defined absolute (<1500, <3000, <5000, and <15 000 ng/L) and relative NT-proBNP targets (>30, >50, and >70%). Population attributable risk fraction (PARF) is the proportion of all-cause 6-month mortality in the population that would be reduced if all patients attain the NT-proBNP target. PARF was determined for each target as well as the percentage of patients attaining the NT-proBNP target. Attainability was investigated by logistic regression analysis. A total of 1266 patients [age 74 (64-80), 60% male] was studied. For every absolute NT-proBNP level, a corresponding percentage reduction was found that resulted in similar PARFs. The highest PARF (∼60-70%) was observed for <1500 or >70%, but attainability was low (27% and 22%, respectively). The strongest predictor for not attaining these targets was admission NT-proBNP. In admission NT-proBNP tertiles, PARFs were significantly different for absolute, but not for relative targets. CONCLUSION: In an ADHF population, pre-discharge absolute or relative NT-proBNP targets may both be useful as they have similar effects on PARF. However, depending on admission NT-proBNP, absolute targets show varying PARFs, while PARFs for relative targets were similar. A relative target is predicted to reduce mortality consistently across the whole spectrum of ADHF patients, while this is not the case using a single absolute target.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stienen et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) (n=1,266). Absolute vs relative pre-discharge NT-proBNP targets was evaluated on Population attributable risk fraction (PARF) for all-cause 6-month mortality. Relative pre-discharge NT-proBNP targets (>70% reduction) yield a population attributable risk fraction of ~60-70% for 6-month mortality consistently across the spectrum of ADHF patients.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: