Why the study?
Does acutely induced hyperthyroidism with triiodothyronine increase serum levels of NT-proBNP in healthy women?
Does acutely induced hyperthyroidism with triiodothyronine increase serum levels of NT-proBNP in healthy women?
Acute induction of hyperthyroidism directly increases NT-proBNP levels independent of cardiac workload, suggesting thyroid function should be considered when interpreting NT-proBNP levels.
T3-induced hyperthyroidism was associated with higher NT-proBNP; leaves open whether thyroid status should be considered when interpreting levels in practice.
OBJECTIVE: Serum N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is elevated in systolic heart failure due to volume expansion and pressure overload. Recent data suggest a direct stimulatory effect of thyroid hormones on NT-proBNP synthesis. We examined the influence of acutely induced hyperthyroidism on serum levels of NT-proBNP. DESIGN: Forty-three healthy women were evaluated before and after treatment with 60 mug triiodothyronine (T(3)) daily for 7 days in a noncontrolled study. MAIN OUTCOME: Before treatment, NT-proBNP was independently and inversely associated with thyrotropin (TSH), (r = -0.34, p = 0.02). T(3) therapy induced an increase in free T(3) (3.3 times, p < 0.0001) and suppression of TSH ( p < 0.0001). Heart rate increased by 14% ( p < 0.0001); weight decreased 0.6 kg ( p < 0.0001). Median NT-proBNP increased from 53 to 66 pg/mL ( p < 0.0001). The increase in NT-proBNP levels was independently associated with increase in free T(3) ( p = 0.05) and with reduction in TSH ( p = 0.04), without any association to the changes in cardiac workload. CONCLUSIONS: NT-proBNP is influenced by thyroid function among healthy women, as demonstrated by an inverse association between TSH and NT-proBNP. Induction of an acute hyperthyroid state resulted in an increase in NT-proBNP, which seems to reflect a direct action of T(3) on the NT-proBNP secretion rather than an effect of increased cardiac workload.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schultz et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: