Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31110904›Full record

ReviewJournal of pediatric intensive care2016

B-Type Cardiac Natriuretic Peptides in the Neonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care Units.

Massimiliano Cantinotti

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pediatric intensive care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Massimiliano CantinottiFondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, Massa, Pisa, Italy.
Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last decade, interest in the brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in the pediatric population has progressively increased. The aim of this article is to provide an up to date review of evidences regarding the use of BNP/NT-proBNP in pediatrics, with a particular focus on neonatal intensive care and congenital heart disease. The potentialities of the BNP have been demonstrated in multiple settings, particularly: the screening of congenital/acquired heart disease (CHD) versus pulmonary disease; the evaluation of CHD severity (grade of heart failure, degree of left-to-right shunts); the management of children undergoing cardiac surgery; and monitoring premature infants with patent arterial duct. BNP/NT-proBNP values may be considered an easy and relatively low cost additional diagnostic and prognostic tool. Interpretation of BNP values in children requires attention to important factors, including: laboratory methods, the type of cardiac defect, its severity, and the presence of extracardiac conditions. Of these, the hemodynamic characteristic of CHD and physiologic variations of BNP values occurring during the first weeks of life play a major role. The current evidences in favor of BNP use are mainly derived from single-center, nonrandomized studies, and cost-effectiveness analysis are still lacking. As such, despite sufficient evidences supporting the diagnostic and prognostic potentialities of BNP, these findings should be reinforced by multicenter, randomized studies specifically designed to evaluate outcomes and cost-effectiveness. In addition, standard consensus documents/guidelines, that are currently lacking, are warranted for a more systematic use of BNP in the pediatric age.

Indexed as

biomarkerBNPchildrencongenital heart diseasenatriuretic peptidesneonates

Identifiers

PMID31110904
PMCPMC6512419
OpenAlexW2346747944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.