Key result
Adding CT-proET-1 or MR-proADM to NT-proBNP improved the diagnostic accuracy of acute heart failure in older ED patients (C-index 0.86 and 0.84 vs 0.81, respectively).
Why the study?
Does the addition of other biomarkers to NT-proBNP improve the diagnostic accuracy of acute heart failure in older patients presenting to the emergency department?
Observational (n=302)
Does the addition of other biomarkers to NT-proBNP improve the diagnostic accuracy of acute heart failure in older patients presenting to the emergency department?
In older patients presenting to the emergency department, adding CT-proET-1 or MR-proADM to NT-proBNP significantly improves the diagnostic accuracy and risk reclassification for acute heart failure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May aid AHF diagnosis in older ED patients; leaves open need for prospective outcome trials before routine use.
AIM: Biomarkers can help to identity acute heart failure (AHF) as the cause of symptoms in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Older patients may prove a diagnostic challenge due to co-morbidities. Therefore we prospectively investigated the diagnostic performance of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) alone or in combination with other biomarkers for AHF upon admission at the ED. METHODS: 302 non-surgical patients aged ≥ 70 years were consecutively enrolled upon admission to the ED. In addition to NT-proBNP, mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), mid-regional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), C-terminal pro-endothelin-1 (CT-proET-1) and ultra-sensitive C-terminal pro-vasopressin (Copeptin-us) were measured at admission. Two cardiologists independently adjudicated the final diagnosis of AHF after reviewing all available baseline data excluding the biomarkers. We assessed changes in C-index, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and net reclassification improvement (NRI) for the multimarker approach. RESULTS: AHF was diagnosed in 120 (40%) patients (age 81±6 years, 64 men, 56 women). Adding MR-ADM to NT-proBNP levels improved C-index (0.84 versus 0.81; p=0.045), and yielded IDI (3.3%; p=0.002), NRI (17%, p<0.001) and continuous NRI (33.3%; p=0.002). Adding CT-proET-1 to NT-proBNP levels improved C index (0.86 versus 0.81, p=0.031), and yielded robust IDI (12.4%; p<0.001), NRI (31.3%, p<0.001) and continuous NRI (69.9%; p<0.001). No other dual or triple biomarker combination showed a significant improvement of both C-index and IDI. CONCLUSION: In older patients presenting to the ED, the addition of CT-proET-1 or MR-proADM to NT-proBNP improves diagnostic accuracy of AHF. Both dual biomarker approaches offer significant risk reclassification improvement over NT-proBNP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bahrmann et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Acute heart failure (n=302). Addition of CT-proET-1 or MR-proADM to NT-proBNP vs. NT-proBNP alone was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy for acute heart failure (C-index) (p=0.031). Adding CT-proET-1 or MR-proADM to NT-proBNP improved the diagnostic accuracy of acute heart failure in older ED patients (C-index 0.86 and 0.84 vs 0.81, respectively).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: