Literature DB >> 24477222

A novel H-FABP assay and a fast prognostic score for risk assessment of normotensive pulmonary embolism.

Claudia Dellas1, Merle Tschepe, Valerie Seeber, Isabella Zwiener, Katherina Kuhnert, Katrin Schäfer, Gerd Hasenfuß, Stavros Konstantinides, Mareike Lankeit.   

Abstract

We tested whether heart-type fatty acid binding protein (H-FABP) measured by a fully-automated immunoturbidimetric assay in comparison to ELISA provides additive prognostic value in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE), and validated a fast prognostic score in comparison to the ESC risk prediction model and the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI). We prospectively examined 271 normotensive patients with PE; of those, 20 (7%) had an adverse 30-day outcome. H-FABP levels determined by immunoturbidimetry were higher (median, 5.2 [IQR; 2.7-9.8] ng/ml) than those by ELISA (2.9 [1.1-5.4] ng/ml), but Bland-Altman plot demonstrated a good agreement of both assays. The area under the curve for H-FABP was greater for immunoturbidimetry than for ELISA (0.82 [0.74-0.91] vs 0.78 [0.68-0.89]; P=0.039). H-FABP measured by immunoturbidimetry (but not by ELISA) provided additive prognostic information to other predictors of 30-day outcome (OR, 12.4 [95% CI, 1.6-97.6]; P=0.017). When H-FABP determined by immunoturbidimetry was integrated into a novel prognostic score (H-FABP, Syncope, and Tachycardia; FAST score), the score provided additive prognostic information by multivariable analysis (OR, 14.2 [3.9-51.4]; p<0.001; c-index, 0.86) which were superior to information obtained by the ESC model (c-index, 0.62; net reclassification improvement (NRI), 0.39 [0.21-0.56]; P<0.001) or the sPESI (c-index, 0.68; NRI, 0.24 [0.05-0.43]; P=0.012). In conclusion, determination of H-FABP by immunoturbidimetry provides prognostic information superior to that of ELISA and, if integrated in the FAST score, appears more suitable to identify patients with an adverse 30-day outcome compared to the ESC model and sPESI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24477222     DOI: 10.1160/TH13-08-0663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  12 in total

Review 1.  Prognostic Value of Biomarkers in Acute Non-massive Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anurag Bajaj; Parul Rathor; Vishal Sehgal; Besher Kabak; Ajay Shetty; Ossama Al Masalmeh; Srikanth Hosur
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 2.584

Review 2.  Risk stratification for clinical severity of pulmonary embolism in patients with cancer: a narrative review and MASCC clinical guidance for daily care.

Authors:  Diego Muñoz-Guglielmetti; Tim Cooksley; Shin Ahn; Carmen Beato; Mario Aramberri; Carmen Escalante; Carme Font
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.359

3.  Validation of a fast prognostic score for risk stratification of normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Lukas Hobohm; Cecilia Becattini; Stavros V Konstantinides; Franco Casazza; Mareike Lankeit
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 5.460

4.  Temporal trends in management and outcome of pulmonary embolism: a single-centre experience.

Authors:  Matthias Ebner; Karl-Patrik Kresoja; Karsten Keller; Lukas Hobohm; Nina I J Rogge; Gerd Hasenfuß; Burkert Pieske; Stavros V Konstantinides; Mareike Lankeit
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 5.460

5.  Implications of Abnormal Troponin Levels With Normal Right Ventricular Function in Normotensive Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

Authors:  Rosa Mirambeaux; Raphael Le Mao; Alfonso Muriel; Beatriz Pintado; Andrea Pérez; Diurbis Velasco; José Luis Lobo; Deisy Barrios; Raquel Morillo; Behnood Bikdeli; David Jiménez
Journal:  Clin Appl Thromb Hemost       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 2.389

6.  Rapid prediction of adverse outcomes for acute normotensive pulmonary embolism: derivation of the Calgary Acute Pulmonary Embolism score.

Authors:  Kevin Solverson; Christopher Humphreys; Zhiying Liang; Graeme Prosperi-Porta; James E Andruchow; Paul Boiteau; Andre Ferland; Eric Herget; Doug Helmersen; Jason Weatherald
Journal:  ERJ Open Res       Date:  2021-04-19

7.  Comparison of 5 acute pulmonary embolism mortality risk scores in patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Tiago Rodrigues; Beatriz Valente Silva; Rui Plácido; Carlos Mendonça; Maria Luísa Urbano; Joana Rigueira; Ana G Almeida; Fausto J Pinto
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2022-02-28

Review 8.  Prognostic models in acute pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Antoine Elias; Susan Mallett; Marie Daoud-Elias; Jean-Noël Poggi; Mike Clarke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  New guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pulmonary embolism: Key changes.

Authors:  Anastasia Erythropoulou-Kaltsidou; Stelina Alkagiet; Konstantinos Tziomalos
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2020-05-26

Review 10.  Acute pulmonary embolism multimodality imaging prior to endovascular therapy.

Authors:  David Sin; Gordon McLennan; Fabian Rengier; Ihab Haddadin; Gustavo A Heresi; John R Bartholomew; Matthias A Fink; Dustin Thompson; Sasan Partovi
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-08-30       Impact factor: 2.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.