Key result
In morbidly obese individuals, GDF-15 yielded a higher AUC for diagnosing LVDD with possible HF than NT-proBNP (0.74 vs 0.56, P<0.0001) and improved net reclassification by 9% (P=0.022).
Why the study?
Does GDF-15 improve the diagnosis of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and possible heart failure compared to NT-proBNP in morbidly obese patients?
Population
258 subjects, including 207 obese subjects with normal ejection fraction and 51 healthy lean subjects.
Comparison
Growth-differentiation factor-15 measurement vs N-terminal pro brain natriuretic hormone…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May improve LVDD diagnosis in morbid obesity versus NT-proBNP; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Cross-Sectional (n=258)
Does GDF-15 improve the diagnosis of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and possible heart failure compared to NT-proBNP in morbidly obese patients?
Effect estimate: NRI 9%
p-value: p=0.022
In morbidly obese patients, GDF-15 is superior to NT-proBNP for diagnosing left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and possible heart failure with normal ejection fraction.
Baessler et al. (2012) conducted a cross-sectional in Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and possible heart failure in morbid obesity (n=258). GDF-15 vs. NT-proBNP was evaluated on Diagnosis of LVDD with possible HF (NRI 9%, p=0.022). In morbidly obese individuals, GDF-15 yielded a higher AUC for diagnosing LVDD with possible HF than NT-proBNP (0.74 vs 0.56, P<0.0001) and improved net reclassification by 9% (P=0.022).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: