Title |
Ischemic biomarker heart-type fatty acid binding protein (hFABP) in acute heart failure - diagnostic and prognostic insights compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, June 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/s12872-015-0026-0 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ursula Hoffmann, Florian Espeter, Christel Weiß, Parviz Ahmad-Nejad, Siegfried Lang, Martina Brueckmann, Ibrahim Akin, Michael Neumaier, Martin Borggrefe, Michael Behnes |
Abstract |
To evaluate diagnostic and long-term prognostic values of hFABP compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I (TnI) in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) suspected of acute heart failure (AHF). 401 patients with acute dyspnea or peripheral edema, 122 suffering from AHF, were prospectively enrolled and followed up to 5 years. hFABP combined with NT-proBNP versus NT-proBNP alone was tested for AHF diagnosis. Prognostic value of hFABP versus TnI was evaluated in models predicting all-cause mortality (ACM) and AHF related rehospitalization (AHF-RH) at 1 and 5 years, including 11 conventional risk factors plus NT-proBNP. Additional hFABP measurements improved diagnostic specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of sole NT-proBNP testing at the cutoff <300 ng/l to "rule out" AHF. Highest hFABP levels (4th quartile) were associated with increased ACM (hazard ratios (HR): 2.1-2.5; p = 0.04) and AHF-RH risk at 5 years (HR 2.8-8.3, p = 0.001). ACM was better characterized in prognostic models including TnI, whereas AHF-RH was better characterized in prognostic models including hFABP. Cox analyses revealed a 2 % increase of ACM risk and 3-7 % increase of AHF-RH risk at 5 years by each unit increase of hFABP of 10 ng/ml. Combining hFABP plus NT-proBNP (<300 ng/l) only improves diagnostic specificity and PPV to rule out AHF. hFABP may improve prognosis for long-term AHF-RH, whereas TnI may improve prognosis for ACM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00143793 . |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
China | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
Researcher | 7 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
Professor | 5 | 7% |
Other | 15 | 21% |
Unknown | 19 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 35% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 15% |
Chemistry | 3 | 4% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Other | 8 | 11% |
Unknown | 20 | 28% |