4.2 Article

Plasma Brain Natriuretic Peptide as a Predictive Marker of Early Recurrent Stroke in Cardioembolic Stroke Patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
Volume 23, Issue 10, Pages 2635-2640

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.06.003

Keywords

Brain natriuretic peptide; biochemical marker; early stroke recurrence; cardioembolic stroke

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Whether brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels are associated with early recurrent stroke in cardioembolic stroke patients was investigated. Methods: From January 2010 to March 2014, consecutive patients within 24 hours of onset of cardioembolic stroke were prospectively enrolled, and admission plasma BNP levels were measured. Recurrent stroke was identified as the occurrence of additional neurologic deficits and the appearance of a new infarct on neuroimaging. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the recurrence group and the nonrecurrence group. Factors associated with stroke recurrence were investigated by multiple logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 348 patients were included; 17 patients (5%) had recurrent stroke during hospitalization. The median interval from stroke onset to recurrent stroke was 4 days (range, 0-30). BNP levels were significantly higher in the recurrence group than in the nonrecurrence group (304.1 vs. 206.5 pg/mL, P 5.029). The optimal cutoff level, sensitivity, and specificity of BNP levels to distinguish the recurrence group from the nonrecurrence group were 255.0 pg/mL, 76%, and 60%, respectively. On multivariate analysis after adjustment for confounders, plasma BNP >= 255.0 pg/mL (odds ratio, 5.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-16.72; P = .005) was independently associated with recurrent stroke during hospitalization in cardioembolic stroke patients. Conclusions: Plasma BNP could be a useful marker for predicting early recurrent stroke during hospitalization in cardioembolic stroke patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available