↓ Skip to main content

The Confounding Effects of Non-cardiac Pathologies on the Interpretation of Cardiac Biomarkers

Overview of attention for article published in Current Heart Failure Reports, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
The Confounding Effects of Non-cardiac Pathologies on the Interpretation of Cardiac Biomarkers
Published in
Current Heart Failure Reports, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11897-018-0398-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marin Nishimura, Alison Brann, Kay-Won Chang, Alan S Maisel

Abstract

Cardiac biomarkers play important roles in routine evaluation of cardiac patients. But while these biomarkers can be extremely valuable, none of them should ever be used by themselves-without adding the clinical context. This paper explores the non-cardiac pathologies that can be seen with the cardiac biomarkers most commonly used. High-sensitivity troponin assay gained FDA approval for use in the USA, and studies demonstrated its diagnostic utility can be extended to patients with renal impairment. Gender-specific cut points may be utilized for high-sensitivity troponin assays. In the realm of the natriuretic peptides, studies demonstrated states of natriuretic peptide deficiency in obesity and in subjects of African-American race. Regardless, BNP and NT-proBNP both retained prognostic utilities across a variety of comorbid conditions. We are rapidly gaining clinical evidence with use of soluble ST2 and procalcitonin levels in management of cardiac disease states. In order to get the most utility from their measurement, one must be aware of non-cardiac pathologies that may affect the levels of biomarkers as although many of these are actually true values, they may not represent the disease we are trying to delineate. A few take-home points are as follows: 1. A biomarker value should never be used without clinical context 2. Serial sampling of biomarkers is often helpful 3. Panels of biomarkers may be valuable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 11 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 39%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 15 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,525,274
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Current Heart Failure Reports
#278
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,871
of 326,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Heart Failure Reports
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.