4.7 Review

Plasma brain natriuretic peptide-guided therapy to improve outcome in heart failure -: The STARS-BNP multicenter study

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 49, 期 16, 页码 1733-1739

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.081

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of a therapeutic strategy using plasma brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels. Background The prognosis of chronic heart failure (CHF) remains poor, even among patients treated in specialized departments. Methods A total of 220 New York Heart Association functional class II to III patients considered optimally treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEls), beta-blockers, and diuretics by CHF specialists were randomized to medical treatment according to either current guidelines (clinical group) or a goal of decreasing BNP plasma levels < 100 pg/ml (BNP group). Outpatient visits were scheduled every month for 3 months, then every 3 months. The primary combined end point was CHF-related death or hospital stay for CHF. Results Both groups were similar for baseline clinical and biological characteristics. Left ventricular ejection fraction was slightly lower in the BNP group than in the clinical group (29.9 +/- 7.7% vs. 31.8 +/- 8.4%, p = 0.05). At the end of the first 3 months, all types of drugs were changed more frequently in the BNP group. Mean dosages of ACEls and beta-blockers were significantly higher in the BNP group (p < 0.05), whereas the mean increase in furosemide dosage was similar in both groups. During follow-up (median 15 months), significantly fewer patients reached the combined end point in the BNP group (24% vs. 52%, p < 0.001). Conclusions In optimally treated CHF patients, a BNP-guided strategy reduced the risk of CHF-related death or hospital stay for CHF. The result was mainly obtained through an increase in ACEI and beta-blocker dosages.

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

4.7
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