...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical Biochemistry >Head to head comparison of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with/without left ventricular systolic dysfunction.
【24h】

Head to head comparison of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with/without left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

机译:左心室收缩功能障碍和无左心室收缩功能障碍的患者的N端前B型利尿钠肽和B型利尿钠肽的头对头比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Human pro-B-type natriuretic peptide is cleaved into the active B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the inactive fragment NT-proBNP. It is unclear if, similar to BNP, NT-proBNP can be used as a marker of impaired left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF). This study evaluated the analytical performance of both assays to detect LV systolic dysfunction. METHODS: In 72 patients with various degrees of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), blood analysis for BNP and NT-proBNP was performed prior to cardiac catheterization, using a point-of-care analyzer (Biosite) and a fully automated laboratory analyzer (Roche-Elecsys), respectively. The within-run and between-run imprecision for BNP and NT-proBNP was calculated. RESULTS: Both markers were able to detect impaired LV EF with the largest area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for NT-proBNP (NT-proBNP: 0.851 (0.747-0.924); BNP: 0.803 (0.692-0.887) 95% confidence interval; P = 0.07). A significant correlation was observed between BNP and NT-proBNP (r 0.9; P < 0.0001). Estimating the within-run imprecision, the coefficient of variance for BNP was 3.14% (n = 20, mean 316 ng/L) to 3.32% (n = 20, mean 820 ng/L) and for NT-proBNP 0.9% (n = 20, mean 4390.8 ng/L) to 1.4% (n = 20, mean 225 ng/L). The between-run imprecision for NT-proBNP ranged between 2.1% (n = 20, mean 224.6 ng/L) and 2% (n = 20, mean 4391 ng/L). Optimal discriminator values for BNP and NT-proBNP were 139 ng/L and 358 ng/L, respectively. However, adjusting the BNP cut-off value to 54 ng/L improved the negative predictive value and sensitivity of the assay. CONCLUSION: Similar to BNP, NT-proBNP is a promising marker in identifying LVSD. Although both assays are reliable and have good analytical performance, their diagnostic cut-off value is dynamic and population-dependent. The slightly wider detection range and the more stable structure of NT-proBNP compared to the BNP assay suggest that NT-proBNP could play an additional role in the evaluation of patients with LV systolic dysfunction.
机译:背景:人类前B型利钠肽被切割成活性B型利钠肽(BNP)和非活性片段NT-proBNP。尚不清楚是否类似于BNP,NT-proBNP是否可用作左心室射血分数(EF)受损的标志物。这项研究评估了两种检测左室收缩功能障碍的分析性能。方法:对72例不同程度的左心室收缩功能不全(LVSD)的患者,在进行心脏导管插入之前,使用现场护理点分析仪(Biosite)和全自动实验室分析仪对BNP和NT-proBNP进行了血液分析( Roche-Elecsys)。计算了BNP和NT-proBNP的批内和批间不精确度。结果:两种标记物都能检测到NT-proBNP(NT-proBNP:0.851(0.747-0.924); BNP:0.803(0.692-0.887))的受试者工作特征曲线下面积最大的左室射血分数受损。时间间隔; P = 0.07)。在BNP和NT-proBNP之间观察到显着相关性(r 0.9; P <0.0001)。估计运行中的不精确度,BNP的方差系数为3.14%(n = 20,平均316 ng / L)至3.32%(n = 20,平均820 ng / L),而NT-proBNP的方差为0.9%(n = 20,平均4390.8 ng / L)到1.4%(n = 20,平均225 ng / L)。 NT-proBNP的运行间不准确度介于2.1%(n = 20,平均224.6 ng / L)和2%(n = 20,平均4391 ng / L)之间。 BNP和NT-proBNP的最佳区分值分别为139 ng / L和358 ng / L。但是,将BNP临界值调整为54 ng / L可以提高阴性预测值和测定灵敏度。结论:与BNP相似,NT-proBNP是鉴定LVSD的有前途的标志物。尽管两种检测方法均可靠且具有良好的分析性能,但它们的诊断临界值是动态的且与人群相关。与BNP分析相比,NT-proBNP的检测范围略宽,结构更稳定,这表明NT-proBNP可能在评估LV收缩功能障碍的患者中发挥额外的作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号