Why the study?
Is ADMA a more sensitive biomarker than NT-proBNP for assessing heart failure severity in adults with congenital heart disease?
Is ADMA a more sensitive biomarker than NT-proBNP for assessing heart failure severity in adults with congenital heart disease?
ADMA may be a more sensitive biomarker than NT-proBNP for assessing clinical heart failure severity (NYHA class) in adults with congenital heart disease.
ADMA merits prospective testing for NYHA grading in ACHD; leaves open any role beyond NT-proBNP without longitudinal validation.
BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure is an important cause for morbidity and mortality in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). While NT-proBNP is an established biomarker for heart failure of non-congenital origin, its value in ACHD has limitations. Asymmetrical dimethylarginine (ADMA) correlates with disease severity and independently predicts adverse clinical events in heart failure of non-congenital origin. Its role in ACHD has not been investigated. METHODS: In 102 patients ADMA and NT-proBNP were measured and related to NYHA class, systemic ventricular function and parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing. RESULTS: In contrast to NT-proBNP ADMA differentiated between NYHA classes I-III. Both, ADMA and NT-proBNP showed a good correlation with parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise testing with comparable receiver-operating characteristic curves for identifying patients with severely limited cardiopulmonary exercise capacity. CONCLUSION: ADMA seems to be a better biomarker than NT-proBNP for the assessment of NYHA class and as a good as NT-proBNP for the estimation of maximum exercise capacity in adults with congenital heart disease. Its use in clinical routine should be evaluated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tutarel et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: