ArticleJournal of endocrinological investigation2010
Comparison between immunoradiometric and fluorimetric brain natriuretic peptide determination in patients with congestive heart failure.
Article in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThis study compared two different methods, namely the immunoradiometric (IRMA) and fluorimetric (FIA), in order to determine plasma brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) in congestive heart failure (CHF) patients.
methodsCHF in-patients underwent echocardiography and plasma BNP determination using both two methods. The echocardiograms analysed left ventricular end-systolic (LVESV) and end-diastolic (LVEDV) volumes and systolic dysfunction [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%].
resultsSeventy-three (71% males, age 67 ± 9.6 yr) patients were enrolled, 31.5% affected by valvular heart disease. The mean LVEF was 39.8 ± 14.1%; in 26 (35%) a hypertensive etiology emerged. The immunoradiometric assay (IRMA) BNP was found to be significantly lower than the FIA determination 116.5 ± 149 pg/ml vs 267.3 ± 285.6 pg/ml; p=0.0001) and the two methods were closely correlated (r=0.89; p=0.00001). Logistic regression demonstrated a significant correlation between BNP, LVEF, and LVESV/LVEDV (r=-0.45, p=0.0003; r=-0.48, p=0.00001; r=0.22 p=0.003; r=0.34 p=0.0001; r=0.13 p=0.02; r=0.28 p=0.001 IRMA and FIA, respectively). IRMA BNP and FIA BNP significantly increased according to the worsening functional class [from 34.3 ± 60.2 pg/ml in NYHA (New York Heart Association) I to 555.5 ± 273.1 pg/ml in NYHA IV; from 86.1 ± 162.1 pg/ml in NYHA I to 1070 ± 42.2 pg/ml in NYHA IV, respectively]. In severe systolic dysfunction (LVEF<30%), receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed a satisfactorily sensitivity and specificity using a cut-off point of 50.6 pg/ml with IRMA and 243 pg/ml with FIA. In mild systolic dysfunction (LVEF<50%), a good sensitivity and specificity using a cut-off point of 42 pg/ml with IRMA and 182 pg/ml with FIA emerged.
conclusionsIn CHF patients both BNP methods correlated with NYHA class, LVEF, and ventricular volumes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.