Home > Key Question 2 Evidence Set - Use of...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Balion C, Don-Wauchope A, Hill S, et al. Use of Natriuretic Peptide Measurement in the Management of Heart Failure [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 Nov. (Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 126.)

  • This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

Appendix IKey Question 2 Evidence Set

Table I-1. Summary of diagnostic properties of studies evaluating BNP in patients with symptoms suggestive of HF at primary care settings (MS Word, 125K)

Table I-2. Detailed diagnostic properties of studies evaluating BNP in patients with symptoms suggestive of HF at primary care settings (MS Word, 103K)

Figure I-1. Summary forest plot of sensitivity and specificity (PC BNP, manufacturer cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-2. Summary forest plot of sensitivity and specificity (PC BNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-3. Summary forest plot of sensitivity and specificity (PC BNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-4. Summary forest plot of LR+ and LR- (PC BNP, manufacturer cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-5. Summary forest plot of LR+ and LR- (PC BNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-6. Summary forest plot of LR+ and LR- (PC BNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-7. Summary forest plot of LogDOR and DOR (PC BNP, manufacturer cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-8. Summary forest plot of LogDOR and DOR (PC BNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-9. Summary forest plot of LogDOR and DOR (PC BNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-10. Summary ROC-curve (PC BNP, manufacturer cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-11. Summary ROC-curve (PC BNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-12. Summary ROC-curve (PC BNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Table I-3. Summary of diagnostic properties of studies that evaluated NT-proBNP in patients with symptoms suggestive of HF in the primary care settings (MS Word, 184K)

Table I-4. Detailed diagnostic properties of studies that evaluated NT-proBNP in patients with symptoms suggestive of heart failure in the primary care settings (MS Word, 143K)

Figure I-13. Summary forest plot of sensitivity and specificity (PC NTProBNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-14. Summary forest plot of sensitivity and specificity (PC NTProBNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-15. Summary forest plot of LR+ and LR- (PC NTProBNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-16. Summary forest plot of LR+ and LR- (PC NTProBNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-17. Summary forest plot of LogDOR and DOR (PC NTProBNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-18. Summary forest plot of LogDOR and DOR (PC NTProBNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-19. Summary ROC-curve (PC NTProBNP, optimum cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Figure I-20. Summary ROC-curve (PC NTProBNP, lowest cut-point), bivariate mixed effect model

Table I-5. Risk of bias and applicability in all diagnosis studies using BNP in primary care (MS Word, 87K)

Table I-6. Risk of bias and applicability in all diagnostic studies using NT-ProBNP in primary care (MS Word, 102K)

Table I-7a. Strength of evidence estimates of two primary outcomes, sensitivity and specificity, based on optimal cutpoint for diagnostic studies utilizing BNP in primary care settings (MS Word, 90K)

Table I-7b. Strength of evidence estimates of two primary outcomes, sensitivity and specificity, based on lowest cutpoint for diagnostic studies utilizing BNP in primary care settings (MS Word, 98K)

Table I-7c. Strength of evidence estimates of two primary outcomes, sensitivity and specificity, based on manufacturer cutpoint for diagnostic studies utilizing BNP in primary care settings (MS Word, 91K)

Table I-8a. Strength of evidence estimates of two primary outcomes, sensitivity and specificity, based on optimal cutpoint for diagnostic studies utilizing NT-proBNP in primary care settings (MS Word, 98K)

Table I-8b. Strength of evidence estimates of two primary outcomes, sensitivity and specificity, based on lowest cutpoint for diagnostic studies utilizing NT-proBNP in primary care settings (MS Word, 103K)

Table I-9. Summary test statistics of publication bias using log diagnostic odds ratios (logDOR), presented separately for different cut points (MS Word, 60K)

Figure I-21. Primary care publication bias: BNP and NT-proBNP

Appendix I Reference List

1.
Arques S, Roux E, Sbragia P, et al. Accuracy of tissue Doppler echocardiography in the emergency diagnosis of decompensated heart failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function: Comparison with B-type natriuretic peptide measurement. Echocardiograph. 2005;22(8):657–64. [PubMed: 16174119]
2.
Aspromonte N, Feola M, Scardovi AB, et al. Early diagnosis of congestive heart failure: Clinical utility of B-type natriuretic peptide testing associated with Doppler echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Med. 2006;7(6):406–13. [PubMed: 16721202]
3.
Barrios V, Llisterri JL, Escobar C, et al. Clinical applicability of B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with suspected heart failure in primary care in Spain: The PANAMA study. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2011;9(5):579–85. [PubMed: 21615321]
4.
Christenson RH, Azzazy HM, Duh SH, et al. Impact of increased body mass index on accuracy of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP for diagnosis of decompensated heart failure and prediction of all-cause mortality. Clin Chem. 2010;56(4):633–41. [PubMed: 20167699]
5.
Fuat A, Murphy JJ, Hungin AP, et al. The diagnostic accuracy and utility of a B-type natriuretic peptide test in a community population of patients with suspected heart failure. Br J Gen Pract. 2006;56(526):327–33. [PMC free article: PMC1837840] [PubMed: 16638247]
6.
Jeyaseelan S, Goudie BM, Pringle SD, et al. A critical re-appraisal of different ways of selecting ambulatory patients with suspected heart failure for echocardiography. Eur J Heart Fail. 2007;9(1):55–61. [PubMed: 16859991]
7.
Kelder JC, Cramer MJ, Verweij WM, et al. Clinical utility of three B-type natriuretic peptide assays for the initial diagnostic assessment of new slow-onset heart failure. J Card Fail. 2011;17(9):729–34. [PubMed: 21872142]
8.
Macabasco-O'Connell A, Meymandi S, Bryg R. B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) is useful in detecting asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction in low-income, uninsured patients. Biol Res Nurs. 2010;11(3):280–7. [PubMed: 19934109]
9.
Mak G, Ryder M, Murphy NF, et al. Diagnosis of new onset heart failure in the community: The importance of a shared-care approach and judicious use of BNP. Ir J Med Sci. 2008;177(3):197–203. [PubMed: 18633669]
10.
Murtagh G, Dawkins IR, O'Connell R, et al. Screening to prevent heart failure (STOP-HF): Expanding the focus beyond asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2012;14(5):480–6. [PubMed: 22416086]
11.
Park HJ, Baek SH, Jang SW, et al. Direct comparison of B-type natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-BNP for assessment of cardiac function in a large population of symptomatic patients. Int J Cardiol. 2010;140(3):336–43. [PubMed: 19147239]
12.
Zaphiriou A, Robb S, Murray-Thomas T, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of plasma BNP and NTproBNP in patients referred from primary care with suspected heart failure: Results of the UK natriuretic peptide study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2005;7(4):537–41. [PubMed: 15921792]
13.
Goode KM, Clark AL, Bristow JA, et al. Screening for left ventricular systolic dysfunction in high-risk patients in primary-care: A cost-benefit analysis. Eur J Heart Fail. 2007;9(12):1186–95. [PubMed: 18006378]
14.
Goode KM, Clark AL, Cleland JG. Ruling out heart failure in primary-care: The cost-benefit of pre-screening using NT-proBNP and QRS width. Int J Cardiol. 2008;130(3):426–37. [PubMed: 18178273]
15.
Gustafsson F, Badskjaer J, Hansen FS, et al. Value of N-terminal proBNP in the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in primary care patients referred for echocardiography. Heart Drug. 2003;3(3):141–6.
16.
Gustafsson F, Steensgaard-Hansen F, Badskjaer J, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic performance of N-terminal ProBNP in primary care patients with suspected heart failure. J Card Fail. 2005;11(5 Suppl):S15–20. [PubMed: 15948095]
17.
Hobbs FD, Davis RC, Roalfe AK, et al. Reliability of N-terminal proBNP assay in diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction within representative and high risk populations. Heart. 2004;90(8):866–70. [PMC free article: PMC1768355] [PubMed: 15253955]
18.
Koschack J, Scherer M, Luers C, et al. Natriuretic peptide vs. clinical information for diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in primary care. BMC Fam Pract. 2008;9:14. [PMC free article: PMC2267193] [PubMed: 18298821]
19.
Lim TK, Dwivedi G, Hayat S, et al. Cost effectiveness of the B type natriuretic peptide, electrocardiography, and portable echocardiography for the assessment of patients from the community with suspected heart failure. Echocardiograph. 2007;24(3):228–36. [PubMed: 17313633]
20.
Mikkelsen KV, Bie P, Moller JE, et al. Neurohormonal activation and diagnostic value of cardiac peptides in patients with suspected mild heart failure. Int J Cardiol. 2006;110(3):324–33. [PubMed: 16213609]
21.
Nielsen LS, Svanegaard J, Klitgaard NA, et al. N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide for discriminating between cardiac and non-cardiac dyspnoea. Eur J Heart Fail. 2004;6(1):63–70. [PubMed: 15012920]
22.
Olofsson M, Boman K. Usefulness of natriuretic peptides in primary health care: An exploratory study in elderly patients. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2010;28(1):29–35. [PMC free article: PMC3440611] [PubMed: 20192890]
23.
Shelton RJ, Clark AL, Goode K, et al. The diagnostic utility of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide for the detection of major structural heart disease in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(19):2353–61. [PubMed: 16952921]
24.
Sivakumar R, Wellsted D, Parker K, et al. Utility of N terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide in elderly patients. Postgrad Med J. 2006;82(965):220–3. [PMC free article: PMC2563698] [PubMed: 16517806]
25.
Stahrenberg R, Edelmann F, Mende M, et al. The novel biomarker growth differentiation factor 15 in heart failure with normal ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2010;12(12):1309–16. [PMC free article: PMC2990410] [PubMed: 20837635]
26.
Valle R, Aspromonte N, Barro S, et al. The NT-proBNP assay identifies very elderly nursing home residents suffering from pre-clinical heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2005;7(4):542–51. [PubMed: 15921793]
27.
Kelder JC, Cramer MJ, van WJ, et al. The diagnostic value of physical examination and additional testing in primary care patients with suspected heart failure. Circulation. 2011;124(25):2865–73. [PubMed: 22104551]
28.
Deeks JJ. Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ. 2001;323(7305):157–62. [PMC free article: PMC1120791] [PubMed: 11463691]
Cover of Use of Natriuretic Peptide Measurement in the Management of Heart Failure
Use of Natriuretic Peptide Measurement in the Management of Heart Failure [Internet].
Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 126.
Balion C, Don-Wauchope A, Hill S, et al.

AHRQ (US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality)

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...