Why the study?
Current ESC and ACC/AHA/HFSA recommendations differ substantially on circulating biomarker use in HF management, and it remains unclear whether multiple biomarker models are more effective than a single biomarker for risk stratification.
Do multiple biomarker models improve risk stratification and prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure compared to a single biomarker approach?
Do multiple biomarker models improve risk stratification and prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure compared to a single biomarker approach?
While multiple biomarker panels improve risk stratification in heart failure beyond natriuretic peptides alone, their routine clinical use remains hindered by economic concerns and guideline gaps.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berezin et al. (2021) conducted a review in Heart failure. Biomarker-guided therapy vs. Usual care / Single biomarker approach was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: