Screening the population for left ventricular hypertrophy and left ventricular systolic dysfunction using natriuretic peptides: Results from the Dallas Heart Study

Background Identification of individuals in the community with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) or left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) may allow earlier initiation of disease-modifying treatment. We performed a comprehensive evaluation of the screening performance of B-type natriuretic pe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe American heart journal Vol. 157; no. 4; pp. 746 - 753.e2
Main Authors de Lemos, James A., MD, McGuire, Darren K., MD, MHSc, Khera, Amit, MD, MSc, Das, Sandeep R., MD, MPH, Murphy, Sabina A., MPH, Omland, Torbjorn, MD, PhD, MPH, Drazner, Mark H., MD, MSc
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, NY Mosby, Inc 01.04.2009
Mosby
Elsevier Limited
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background Identification of individuals in the community with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) or left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) may allow earlier initiation of disease-modifying treatment. We performed a comprehensive evaluation of the screening performance of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) for LVSD or LVH. Methods In 2,429 subjects without a history of heart failure, myocardial infarction, valvular abnormalities, or a serum creatinine >2.0 mg/dL enrolled in the Dallas Heart Study, measurement of BNP and NT-proBNP and cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging were performed. Results B-type natriuretic peptide and NT-proBNP were robustly associated with magnetic resonance imaging–defined LVH and LVSD (ejection fraction <55%) among men and women ( P < .0001 for each). In the overall population, neither test discriminated well for LVH or LVSD (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] <0.7). Among women, no differences in AUROC were observed between BNP and NT-proBNP. Among men, AUROCs were similar between BNP and NT-proBNP in the overall population, but among subgroups age 50 or older, or with hypertension, the AUROCs for NT-proBNP (0.73-0.79) were higher than for BNP (0.63-0.69, P < .05 for each comparison). Compared with subjects with isolated BNP elevation (>97.5th percentile), those with isolated NT-proBNP elevation had worse renal function and more LVH and coronary calcium ( P < .05 for each). Conclusions Overall, neither BNP nor NT-proBNP accurately discriminated subjects with LVH or LVSD in this predominately young and healthy population-based cohort. However, among high-risk men, NT-proBNP performed slightly better than BNP and comparably with other routinely used screening tests such as prostate-specific antigen measurement for prostate cancer.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0002-8703
1097-6744
DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.12.017