Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30064502›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2018

B-type natriuretic peptide-guided therapy for heart failure (HF): a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) and aggregate data.

Maria Pufulete, Rachel Maishman, Lucy Dabner, Julian P T Higgins, Chris A Rogers, Mark Dayer, John MacLeod, Sarah Purdy, William Hollingworth, Morten Schou and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Biomarkers of HFpEF: Natriuretic Peptides, High-Sensitivity Troponins and Beyond.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.

Maria PufuleteClinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 7, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Queen's Building, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK. maria.pufulete@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1775-1949
Rachel MaishmanClinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 7, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Queen's Building, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK.
Lucy DabnerClinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 7, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Queen's Building, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK.
Julian P T HigginsSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Chris A RogersClinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 7, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Queen's Building, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK.
Mark DayerDepartment of Cardiology, Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton, UK.
John MacLeodSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Sarah PurdySchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
William HollingworthSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Morten SchouHerlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Herlev, DK-2730, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Manuel Anguita-SanchezAgencia de Investigación de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología, Madrid, Spain.
Patric KarlströmDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, County Hospital Ryhov, Jönköping, Sweden.
Michael Kleiner ShochatHeart Institute, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.
Theresa McDonaghCardiovascular Division, King's College Hospital, King's College London, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9RS, UK.
Angus K NightingaleDepartment of Cardiology, Bristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK.
Barnaby C ReevesClinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 7, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Queen's Building, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK.
Bristol Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBGentofte Hospital · DKHillel Yaffe Medical Center · ILKing's College London · GBRyhov Hospital Jönköping · SESociedad Española de Cardiología · ESTaunton & Somerset NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health 11/102/03Health Technology Assessment Programme 11-102-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe estimated the effectiveness of serial B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) blood testing to guide up-titration of medication compared with symptom-guided up-titration of medication in patients with heart failure (HF).

methodsSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched: MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to 9/06/2016; Embase (Ovid), 1980 to 2016 week 23; the Cochrane Library; ISI Web of Science (Citations Index and Conference Proceedings). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were death related to HF, cardiovascular death, all-cause hospital admission, hospital admission for HF, adverse events, and quality of life. IPD were sought from all RCTs identified. Random-effects meta-analyses (two-stage) were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CIs) across RCTs, including HR estimates from published reports of studies that did not provide IPD. We estimated treatment-by-covariate interactions for age, gender, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, HF type; diabetes status and baseline BNP subgroups. Dichotomous outcomes were analysed using random-effects odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI.

resultsWe identified 14 eligible RCTs, five providing IPD. BNP-guided therapy reduced the hazard of hospital admission for HF by 19% (13 RCTs, HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98) but not all-cause mortality (13 RCTs; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.01) or cardiovascular mortality (5 RCTs; OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.16). For all-cause mortality, there was a significant interaction between treatment strategy and age (p = 0.034, 11 RCTs; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92, patients < 75 years old and HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84-1.37, patients ≥ 75 years old); ejection fraction (p = 0.026, 11 RCTs; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF); and HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.83-2.11, patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)). Adverse events were significantly more frequent with BNP-guided therapy vs. symptom-guided therapy (5 RCTs; OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.60).

conclusionBNP-guided therapy did not reduce mortality but reduced HF hospitalisation. The overall quality of the evidence varied from low to very low. The relevance of these findings to unselected patients, particularly those managed by community generalists, are unclear. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42013005335.

Indexed as

HospitalizationQuality of LifeCause of DeathHeart FailureHumansMortalityNatriuretic Peptide, BrainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicNatriuretic Peptide, BrainB-type natriuretic peptideHeart failureIPD meta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30064502
PMCPMC6069819
OpenAlexW2885695089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.