Key result
Adding MR-proANP to a multivariable clinical model for diagnosing heart failure in T2DM outpatients with dyspnea increased the area under the curve from 0.69 to 0.78 (P<0.001).
Why the study?
The prevalence of HF in patients with T2DM is debatable, and no data exist concerning the diagnostic value of MR-proANP.
Does MR-proANP improve the diagnosis of heart failure in outpatients with type 2 diabetes?
Observational (n=806)
Yes
Does MR-proANP improve the diagnosis of heart failure in outpatients with type 2 diabetes?
MR-proANP is a highly sensitive biomarker that effectively rules out HFrEF and improves overall diagnostic accuracy for heart failure in outpatients with type 2 diabetes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May enhance HF diagnostic models in T2DM outpatients with dyspnea; leaves open need for prospective validation before practice change.
The prevalence of heart failure (HF) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is debatable and no data exist concerning the diagnostic value of mid-regional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP). We aimed to identify HF prevalence and evaluate the diagnostic value of MR-proANP in outpatients followed in two specialized diabetes clinics. HF was pre-defined as HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The prevalence of HFrEF and HFpEF was 2.4% and 17.5%, respectively. An MR-proANP <60 pmol/L ruled out HFrEF in the total population (n = 806) and in patients reporting dyspnea (n = 311) with a sensitivity of 94.7% and 87.5%, a negative predictive value of 99.7% and 99.0%, a specificity of 39.5% and 33.0%, and a positive predictive value of 3.6% and 3.3%, respectively. In a multivariable model including age, sex, T2DM duration, albuminuria, uncontrolled systolic blood pressure, abnormal electrocardiogram and ischaemic heart disease for diagnosis of HF in patients reporting dyspnea, adding MR-proANP increased the area under the curve from 0.69 to 0.78 (P < 0.001). In conclusion, HFrEF was rare among outpatients with T2DM. MR-proANP rules out HFrEF and contributes independent information relevant to diagnosis of HF in patients reporting dyspnea.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jensen et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Type 2 diabetes (n=806). MR-proANP vs. Multivariable clinical model without MR-proANP was evaluated on Diagnosis of heart failure in patients reporting dyspnea (AUC, p=<0.001). Adding MR-proANP to a multivariable clinical model for diagnosing heart failure in T2DM outpatients with dyspnea increased the area under the curve from 0.69 to 0.78 (P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: