AIMS: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) measurement in screening for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) has been evaluated in the general population, but corresponding information on proBNP and the N-terminal proBNP fragment is still limited. We therefore examined whether proBNP measurement is useful for LVH and LVSD screening in the general population. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the 4th Copenhagen City Heart Study, 3497 participants underwent echocardiography with assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and mass. The impact of gender and age was determined and the diagnostic performance of the plasma proBNP concentration was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Of 1502 men and 1995 women, 4.1 and 2.6% had LVSD defined as an LVEF<60% whereas only 0.4% displayed LVEF<40%. The proBNP concentration was 1.7-fold higher in women compared with men (P<0.0001) and related to age in both genders. The mean proBNP plasma concentration was two-fold higher in subjects with LVSD than without LVSD (P<0.0001). Likewise, LVH imposed a 1.9-fold increase in the proBNP concentration (P<0.0001): Both differences persisted after adjusting for ischaemic heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, gender, and age. The diagnostic performance of proBNP in detecting LVEF<40% was high with an area under the ROC curves of 0.92 (95% CI 0.79-1.00) in women and 0.85 (95% CI 0.74-0.96) in men. CONCLUSION: We have established the impact of age and gender on the proBNP concentration in a large, community-based cohort. The diagnostic performance for proBNP measurement in screening for LVH and LVSD in the general population parallels the reported data for BNP.
AIMS: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) measurement in screening for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) has been evaluated in the general population, but corresponding information on proBNP and the N-terminal proBNP fragment is still limited. We therefore examined whether proBNP measurement is useful for LVH and LVSD screening in the general population. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the 4th Copenhagen City Heart Study, 3497 participants underwent echocardiography with assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and mass. The impact of gender and age was determined and the diagnostic performance of the plasma proBNP concentration was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Of 1502 men and 1995 women, 4.1 and 2.6% had LVSD defined as an LVEF<60% whereas only 0.4% displayed LVEF<40%. The proBNP concentration was 1.7-fold higher in women compared with men (P<0.0001) and related to age in both genders. The mean proBNP plasma concentration was two-fold higher in subjects with LVSD than without LVSD (P<0.0001). Likewise, LVH imposed a 1.9-fold increase in the proBNP concentration (P<0.0001): Both differences persisted after adjusting for ischaemic heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, gender, and age. The diagnostic performance of proBNP in detecting LVEF<40% was high with an area under the ROC curves of 0.92 (95% CI 0.79-1.00) in women and 0.85 (95% CI 0.74-0.96) in men. CONCLUSION: We have established the impact of age and gender on the proBNP concentration in a large, community-based cohort. The diagnostic performance for proBNP measurement in screening for LVH and LVSD in the general population parallels the reported data for BNP.
Authors: Wendy Ying; Di Zhao; Pamela Ouyang; Vinita Subramanya; Dhananjay Vaidya; Chiadi E Ndumele; Kavita Sharma; Sanjiv J Shah; Susan R Heckbert; Joao A Lima; Christopher R deFilippi; Matthew J Budoff; Wendy S Post; Erin D Michos Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Olaf Schulz; Andre Rudolph; Sarah Scheiner; Helena Mut; Jeanette Schulz-Menger; Gunnar Berghoefer; Ricarda Bensch; Jochen Kraemer; Ingolf Schimke Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2010-09-02 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Daisuke Kamimura; Paul D Loprinzi; Wanmei Wang; Takeki Suzuki; Kenneth R Butler; Thomas H Mosley; Michael E Hall Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Yenn-Jiang Lin; Marcio Jansen de Oliveira Figueiredo; Alireza Sepehri Shamloo; Alberto Alfie; Serge Boveda; Nikolaos Dagres; Dario Di Toro; Lee L Eckhardt; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Carina Hardy; Takanori Ikeda; Aparna Jaswal; Elizabeth Kaufman; Andrew Krahn; Kengo Kusano; Valentina Kutyifa; Han S Lim; Gregory Y H Lip; Santiago Nava-Townsend; Hui-Nam Pak; Gerardo Rodríguez Diez; William Sauer; Anil Saxena; Jesper Hastrup Svendsen; Diego Vanegas; Marmar Vaseghi; Arthur Wilde; T Jared Bunch; Alfred E Buxton; Gonzalo Calvimontes; Tze-Fan Chao; Lars Eckardt; Heidi Estner; Anne M Gillis; Rodrigo Isa; Josef Kautzner; Philippe Maury; Joshua D Moss; Gi-Byung Nam; Brian Olshansky; Luis Fernando Pava Molano; Mauricio Pimentel; Mukund Prabhu; Wendy S Tzou; Philipp Sommer; Janice Swampillai; Alejandro Vidal; Thomas Deneke; Gerhard Hindricks; Christophe Leclercq Journal: Europace Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Daniel Tiller; Martin Russ; Karin Halina Greiser; Sebastian Nuding; Henning Ebelt; Alexander Kluttig; Jan A Kors; Joachim Thiery; Mathias Bruegel; Johannes Haerting; Karl Werdan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maria H Kroon; Katja van den Hurk; Marjan Alssema; Otto Kamp; Coen D A Stehouwer; Ronald M A Henry; Michaela Diamant; Frans Boomsma; Giel Nijpels; Walter J Paulus; Jacqueline M Dekker Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 19.112