Literature DB >> 27760781

Biomarkers for Clinical Decision-Making in the Management of Pulmonary Embolism.

Evangelos Giannitsis1, Hugo A Katus2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with high all-cause and PE-related mortality and requires individualized management. After confirmation of PE, a refined risk stratification is particularly warranted among normotensive patients. Previous prognostic models favored combinations of echocardiography or computed tomography suggestive of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction together with biomarkers of RV dysfunction (natriuretic peptides) or myocardial injury (cardiac troponins) to identify candidates for thrombolysis or embolectomy. In contrast, current predictive models using clinical scores such as the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) or its simplified version (sPESI) rather seek to identify patients, not only those at higher risk requiring observation for early detection of hemodynamic decompensation, and the need for initiation of rescue reperfusion therapy, but also those at low risk qualifying for early discharge and outpatient treatment. Almost all prediction models advocate the additional measurement of biomarkers along with imaging of RV dysfunction as part of a comprehensive algorithm. CONTENT: The following mini-review will provide an updated overview on the individual components of different algorithms with a particular focus on guideline-recommended and new, less-established biomarkers for risk stratification, and how biomarkers should be implemented and interpreted.
SUMMARY: Ideally, biomarkers should be part of a comprehensive risk stratification algorithm used together with clinical risk scores as a basis, and/or imaging. For this purpose, cardiac troponins, including high-sensitivity troponin generations, natriuretic peptides, and h-FABP (heart-type fatty acid-binding protein) are currently recommended in guidelines. There is emerging evidence for several novel biomarkers that require further validation before being applied in clinical practice.
© 2016 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27760781     DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2016.255240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  5 in total

Review 1.  Cardiovascular Biomarkers: Lessons of the Past and Prospects for the Future.

Authors:  Farah Omran; Ioannis Kyrou; Faizel Osman; Ven Gee Lim; Harpal Singh Randeva; Kamaljit Chatha
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 6.208

Review 2.  [Essential cardiac biomarkers in the differential diagnosis of acute chest pain : An update].

Authors:  M Vafaie; E Giannitsis; H A Katus
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.443

3.  Pentraxin-3 Levels Relate to the Wells Score and Prognosis in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

Authors:  Haotian Yang; Jun Zhang; Ying Huan; Yawei Xu; Rong Guo
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 3.434

4.  Does Baseline BUN Have an Additive Effect on the Prediction of Mortality in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism?

Authors:  Yaser Jenab; Ali-Mohammad Haji-Zeinali; Mohammad Javad Alemzadeh-Ansari; Shapour Shirani; Mojtaba Salarifar; Mohammad Alidoosti; Hamed Vahidi; Marzieh Pourjafari; Arash Jalali
Journal:  J Tehran Heart Cent       Date:  2020-04

5.  Risk prediction in stable cardiovascular disease using a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T single biomarker strategy compared to the ESC-SCORE.

Authors:  Moritz Biener; Evangelos Giannitsis; Manuel Kuhner; Thomas Zelniker; Matthias Mueller-Hennessen; Mehrshad Vafaie; Kiril M Stoyanov; Franz-Josef Neumann; Hugo A Katus; Willibald Hochholzer; Christian Marc Valina
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2018-04-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.