Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Int J Cardiol. 2010 Apr 30;140(3):336-43. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.11.107. Epub 2009 Jan 15.

Direct comparison of B-type natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-BNP for assessment of cardiac function in a large population of symptomatic patients.

Author information

  • 1Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.



B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NTproBNP) levels showed frequent discrepancies in individual patients.


The aims were 1) to compare the abilities of BNP and NTproBNP for the detection of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) or diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in the symptomatic patients, and 2) to assess the direct correlation and its independent determinants between them.


1032 patients with dyspnea underwent BNP and NTproBNP measurements simultaneously. 967/1032 (93.7%) patients underwent echocardiography. Using the receiver operation characteristic curve analyses for the detection of LVSD (EF<45%) or advanced LVDD, the area under the curves (AUC) of both biomarkers was compared according to age, gender, body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin (Hb), and glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Using multiple regression analysis, the direct correlation and its independent determinants were identified between them.


In the entire population, the AUCs of BNP and NTproBNP had no significant differences (LVSD: 0.909 vs. 0.893, p=0.20; advanced LVDD: 0.897 vs. 0.879, p=0.13). In patients with BMI<25, the AUCs of BNP were significantly higher than those of NTproBNP (LVSD: 0.897 vs. 0.869, p=0.03; advanced LVDD: 0.916 vs. 0.885, p=0.02). They had strong correlation (r=0.895, p<0.001) and LVEF, eGFR<60 ml/min, Hb<12 g/dl and use of diuretics were the independent determinants between them.


BNP and NTproBNP displayed strong correlation and near-identical performances for the screening of cardiac dysfunction. However, LVEF, renal function, Hb and use of diuretics should be considered for clinical interpretation.

Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk