...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinica chimica acta: International journal of clinical chemistry and applied molecular biology >Head-to-head comparison of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-atrial natriuretic peptide in diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction.
【24h】

Head-to-head comparison of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-atrial natriuretic peptide in diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction.

机译:N端脑钠肽,脑钠肽和N端尿钠肽在诊断左心室功能障碍中的对比研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), NT-proBNP and NT-pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (NT-proANP) were measured in blood samples from 57 patients using immunoassays and immunoradiometric assays to evaluate the usefulness as diagnostic markers for the detection of heart failure. For the detection of impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), receiver operating characteristic curves showed that BNP had the best diagnostic performance with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.75+/-0.06. However, NT-proBNP (AUC: 0.67+/-0.07) and NT-proANP (AUC: 0.69+/-0.08) showed no significant difference to BNP. In a further analysis for the detection of resting LVEF <40%, BNP again was the best marker with an AUC of 0.83+/-0.06. NT-proBNP showed only a slightly smaller AUC (0.79+/-0.07). The AUC for NT-proANP was significantly smaller (0.65+/-0.08) compared to BNP. Additionally, BNP and NT-proBNP correlated negatively with the resting LVEF (BNP: -0.472, p<0.001; NT-proBNP: -0.306, p=0.026), whereas NT-proANP showed no significant correlation. In summary, BNP was the best marker to detect patients with impaired LVEF compared to NT-proBNP and NT-proANP. However, NT-proBNP showed no significant differences to BNP and it is therefore a new promising alternative marker for the detection of left ventricular dysfunction.
机译:使用免疫测定法和免疫放射测定法对57例患者的血液样本中的脑钠素(BNP),NT-proBNP和NT-pro心钠素(NT-proANP)进行了评估,以评估其作为诊断心力衰竭的诊断指标的有效性。对于左心室射血分数(LVEF)受损的检测,接收机的工作特性曲线表明,BNP具有最佳的诊断性能,曲线下面积(AUC)为0.75 +/- 0.06。但是,NT-proBNP(AUC:0.67 +/- 0.07)和NT-proANP(AUC:0.69 +/- 0.08)与BNP没有显着差异。在对静息LVEF <40%的检测进行的进一步分析中,BNP仍是最佳标记,AUC为0.83 +/- 0.06。 NT-proBNP仅显示较小的AUC(0.79 +/- 0.07)。与BNP相比,NT-proANP的AUC显着较小(0.65 +/- 0.08)。此外,BNP和NT-proBNP与静止的LVEF呈负相关(BNP:-0.472,p <0.001; NT-proBNP:-0.306,p = 0.026),而NT-proANP没有显着相关性。总之,与NT-proBNP和NT-proANP相比,BNP是检测LVEF受损患者的最佳标记。然而,NT-proBNP与BNP没有显着差异,因此它是检测左心功能不全的新的有希望的替代标记。

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