|
|
||||||||
Letters to the Editor |
Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, CH-4031, Basel, Switzerland, Fax 0041-61-2655353, E-mail chmueller{at}uhbs.ch.
To the Editor:
I read with great interest the paper by Clerico et al. (1), which described a comparable diagnostic accuracy of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the N-terminal part of the propeptide of BNP (NT-proBNP) in patients with heart failure. The authors are to be congratulated for addressing this important issue.
There are two details that concern me that might benefit from additional explanations from the authors. First, the paper cites an important study that compared both markers in elderly patients only (2). This patient subset is of major importance because diagnostic uncertainty seems to be highest in elderly patients (3). BNP was found to have significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than NT-proBNP (area under the curve 0.85 vs 0.80) in elderly patients. Unfortunately, in Table 2 and in Fig. 3, these data seem to be incorrectly displayed, indicating the opposite result (superiority of NT-proBNP). The authors may wish to correct this presentation of their data and recalculate their metaanalysis accordingly. Second, the expression "chronic heart failure" does not seem appropriate for the second part of the analysis, because the studies summarized in Table 1 and Fig. 2 tested both peptides in the detection of left ventricular systolic and/or diastolic dysfunction. Please note that chronic heart failure must not be used interchangeably as a term for these conditions.
Acknowledgments
Grant/funding support: None declared.
Financial disclosures: I have received research support from Biosite, Brahms, Abbott, and Roche, and speakers honoraria from Abbott, Bayer, Biosite, Brahms, Dade Behring, and Roche.
References
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |