Observational studyBioscience reports2022
N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and adverse outcomes in Chinese patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Observational study in Bioscience reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incremental Value of NT-proBNP Over HCM-AF Score in Risk Stratification for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.Clinical cardiology · 2026Article
- Correlation between 25-hydroxyvitamin D, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, inflammatory factors and myocardial injury in children with mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Focal ischemic myocardial fibrosis assessed by late gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Genetic Foundations, Outcomes, Interconnections, and Their Modifiers.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough numerous studies have suggested that elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is positively correlated with cardiovascular events, especially the heart failure and heart failure-related death (HFRD), evidence of the association between NT-proBNP and the adverse outcomes of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is still relatively limited. The present study was performed to evaluate the relationship between NT-proBNP and outcomes in patients with HCM.
methodsObservational cohort methodology was used in the present study, and a total of 227 patients were included. And the patients were followed for 44.97 ± 16.37 months. Patients were categorized into three groups according to these NT-proBNP tertiles: first tertile (≤910 pg/ml, n=68), second tertile (913-2141 pg/ml, n=68), and third tertile (≥2151 pg/ml, n=69). The adverse outcomes of the present study were all-cause death (ACD) and cardiac death (CD).
resultsAccording to the risk category of NT-proBNP, the incidence of ACD (P=0.005) and CD (P=0.032) among the three groups showed significant differences. Multivariate Cox regression analysis suggested that the ACD and CD in the third tertile have 7.022 folds (hazard risk [HR] = 7.022 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.397-35.282], P=0.018) and 7.129 folds (HR = 7.129 [95% CI: 1.329-38.237], P=0.022) increased risks as compared with those in the first tertile. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses showed that the cumulative risks of ACD and CD in patients with HCM tended to increase.
conclusionThe present study indicated NT-proBNP was a novel biomarker suitable for predicting adverse prognosis in patients with HCM, which may be used for early recognition and risk stratification.
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.