 |
|
Comparison of N-Terminal Pro–B-Natriuretic Peptide, C-Reactive Protein, and Creatinine Clearance for Prognosis in Patients With Known Coronary Heart Disease
Dietrich Rothenbacher, MD, MPH;
Wolfgang Koenig, MD;
Hermann Brenner, MD, MPH
Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:2455-2460.
Background The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic role of N-terminal pro–B-natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) serum level compared with C-reactive protein (CRP) level and creatinine clearance (CrCl) for the subsequent risk of cardiovascular events in a large cohort of patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD).
Methods Serum concentrations of NT-proBNP and CRP and CrCl were measured at baseline in a cohort of 1051 patients aged 30 to 70 years with CHD. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the prognostic value of NT-proBNP, CRP, and CrCl on a combined cardiovascular disease (CVD) end point (fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke).
Results During follow-up (mean of 48.7 months), 95 patients (9.0%) experienced a secondary CVD event. Patients in the top quartile of the NT-proBNP distribution at baseline had a hazard ratio (HR) of 3.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.74-6.45) for subsequent secondary CVD events compared with those in the bottom quartile (P for trend <.001) after controlling for age, sex, smoking status, history of diabetes mellitus, initial management of CHD, rehabilitation clinic, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and treatment with lipid-lowering drugs. For CRP, the corresponding HR was 1.76 (95% CI, 0.96-3.24) (P value for trend, .06). Patients with CrCl levels lower than 60 mL/min had an HR of 2.39 (95% CI, 1.06-5.40) compared with patients with a CrCl of 90 mL/min or higher (P for trend, .002). If all 3 markers were included simultaneously in 1 model, NT-proBNP still showed predictive ability for recurrent CVD events.
Conclusion N-terminal proBNP may be a clinically useful marker weeks after an acute coronary event and may provide complementary prognostic information to established risk determinants.
Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany (Drs Rothenbacher and Brenner); and Department of Internal Medicine II–Cardiology, University of Ulm Medical Center, Ulm, Germany (Dr Koenig).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
The Latest and Greatest New Biomarkers: Which Ones Should We Measure for Risk Prediction in Our Practice?
James A. de Lemos
Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(22):2428-2430.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Renal and cardiac function for long-term (10 year) risk stratification after myocardial infarction
Palmer et al.
Eur Heart J 2009;30:1486-1494.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use of Framingham risk score and new biomarkers to predict cardiovascular mortality in older people: population based observational cohort study
de Ruijter et al.
BMJ 2009;338:a3083-a3083.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Atherogenic dyslipidaemia but not total- and high-molecular weight adiponectin are associated with the prognostic outcome in patients with coronary heart disease
von Eynatten et al.
Eur Heart J 2008;29:1307-1315.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Glomerular Filtration Rate and N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide as Predictors of Cardiovascular Mortality in Vascular Patients
Shadman et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2172-2181.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Newer Biomarkers Add Little in Predicting Death, CV Events
JWatch General 2007;2007:2-2.
FULL TEXT
The Latest and Greatest New Biomarkers: Which Ones Should We Measure for Risk Prediction in Our Practice?
de Lemos
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:2428-2430.
FULL TEXT
|
