4.5 Article

B-Type natriuretic peptide-guided treatment for predicting outcome in patients hospitalized in sub-intensive care unit with acute heart failure

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC FAILURE
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 219-224

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.10.009

关键词

B-type natriuretic peptide; heart failure; prognosis; discharge criteria; hospitalization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Studies with natriuretic peptides have suggested that physicians do not treat heart acute failure (AHF) aggressively enough, and predischarge B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels may be a useful reminder that more treatment is required. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate that variations in BNP levels during hormone-guided treatment and measured body hydration status enable the timing of the patient's discharge to be optimized. Methods and Results: We retrospectively evaluated 186 patients admitted for AHR All subjects underwent serial bioelectrical impedance analysis and BNP measurement. Therapy was titrated according to BNP value to reach a BNP value of < 250 pg/mL, whenever is possible. A BNP value on discharge of < 250 pg/mL (obtained in 54% of the patients) predicted a 16% event rate within 6 months, whereas a value > 250 pg/mL was associated with a far higher percentage (78%) of adverse events. Among the former, no significant differences in event rate were seen in relation to the time necessary to obtain a reduction in BNP values below 250 pg/mL (14 versus 18%, chi-square = 0.3, NS). Cox regression showed that a BNP cutoff value of 250 pg/mL is the most accurate predictors of events. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the usefulness of BNP in intrahospital stratification of AHF, in the decision-making process, and as a tool for tailored therapy. Integrating this approach into the routine assessment of HF patients would allow clinicians to more accurately identify high-risk patients, who may derive increased benefit from intensive in-hospital management strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据