Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics of the 28 included studies for the detection of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

From: Natriuretic peptides for the detection of diastolic dysfunction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction—a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author, country [Ref.] Study design Study setting Marker (assay) Patient population Control population Age and sex
Patient Control
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
 Arques, EU [33] Cross-sectional Secondary BNP (FEIA) Hospitalised AF and DOE patients (N = 22) Hospitalised AF patients with NCD (N = 19) 84.3 ± 5.2 y; 68% F 83.6 ± 5.1 y; 47% F
 Arques, EU [32] Cross-sectional Secondary BNP (FEIA) AMB DOE Cath referrals (N = 15) AMB DOE Cath referrals (N = 11) 58 (48–67) y; 27% F 57 (54–66) y; 55% F
 Borlaug, USA [37] Cross-sectional Tertiary BNP (unknown) AMB Cath referrals (N = 32) AMB Cath referrals with NCD (N = 23) 65 ± 13 y; 72% F 47 ± 17 y; 65% F
 Martos, EU [38] Cross-sectional Tertiary BNP (FEIA) AMB HTN patients (N = 33) AMB HTN patients (N = 20) 72 ± 11 y; 47% F 64 ± 10 y; 25% F
 Mason, EU [63] Case-control Primary BNP (FEIA) and NT-proBNP Care home residents (N = 57) Care home residents (N = 308) 84.2 ± 7.2 y; 74% F*  
 Watson, EU [64] Case-control Tertiary BNP (FEIA) AMB patients (N = 75) AMB HFrEF patients (N = 75) 75 ± 7 y; 41% F 70 ± 11 y; 27% F
 Zordoky, CA [65] Case-control Tertiary BNP (FEIA) and NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 24) Healthy controls (N = 38) 67.5 (17.3) y; 25% F 61.5 (15.3) y; 52.6% F
 Baessler, EU [34] Cross-sectional Tertiary NT-proBNP Obese patients (N = 88) Obese patients (N = 119) 50.3 ± 7.3 y; 55% F 41.7 ± 12.1 y; 73% F
 Barroso, EU [35] Cross-sectional Secondary NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 77) AMB controls (N = 55) 73 (68–77) y; 59.7% F 54 (48–61) y; 37.3% F
 Berezin, EU [36] Cross-sectional Secondary NT-proBNP Hospitalised suspected HF patients (N = 79) Hospitalised HFrEF patients (N = 85) 54.8 ± 6.6 y; 53.2% F 57.5 ± 6.7 y; 42.4% F
 Celik, EU [59] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB DHF patients (N = 71) Controls (N = 50) 57.1 ± 7.4 y; 63.4% F 56.2 ± 7.0 y; 58% F
 Cui, AS [60] Case-control Secondary NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 172) Random AMB controls from same hospital (N = 30) 73 ± 9.2 y; 55.8% F 67 ± 4.8 y; 40% F
 Cui, AS [31] Case-control Secondary NT-proBNP (ELISA) and MRproANP Hospitalised patients (N = 65) Age- and sex-matched hospitalised CVD patients (N = 75) 69 ± 14 y; 50.8% F 66 ± 11 y; 50.7% F
 Kim, AS [61] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB patients with DD (N = 228) AMB patients with silent DD (N = 180) 68.3 ± 11.4 y; 61% F 62.3 ± 12.2 y; 58.3% F
 Liu, AS [62] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP (ELISA) AMB chronic HFpEF patients (N = 50) Healthy controls (N = 50) 64.3 ± 5.7 y; 46% F 63.8 ± 6 y; 54% F
 Nikolova, USA [75] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 52) Healthy controls (N = 52) and controls with HF risk factor (N = 52) 57 ± 15 y; 37% F Healthy/HF risk factor:
52 ± 6 y; 37% F
52 ± 9 y; 37% F
 Polat, EU [66] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP (ELISA) AMB HFpEF patients (N = 44) AMB patients without HF (N = 38) 60 ± 6.8 y; 45.5% F 57 ± 9 y; 47.4% F
 Reddy, USA [39] Cross-sectional Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB HFpEF patients (N = 267) AMB patients with NCD (N = 147) 68 ± 11 y; 61% F 56 ± 15 y; 59% F
 Sanders-van Wijk, EU [40] Cross-sectional Secondary NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 112) AMB HFrEF patients (N = 458) 80 ± 7 y; 64% F 76 ± 7 y; 33% F
 Santhanakrishnan, AS [67] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB HF patients (N = 50) Healthy controls (N = 50) 69 ± 12 y; 42% F 63 ± 8 y; 54% F
 Shuai, AS [68] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB patients (N = 45) AMB HTN patients and healthy controls (N = 53) 68 ± 12 y; 55% F Not reported
 Sinning, EU [41] Cross-sectional Primary NT-proBNP Random residents (N = 70) Random residents with HFrEF(N = 38) 67 (62–72) y; 50% F 64 (57.8–70.0) y; 21.1% F
 Stahrenberg, EU [69] Case-control Primary NT-proBNP AMB CHF patients (N = 85) Healthy controls (N = 188) Not reported 56 (52–63) y; 66% F
 Toma, CA [70] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP (RAMP) AMB patients (N = 21) AMB HFrEF patients (N = 48) 70 (16) y; 52.4% F 66 (13.7) y; 27.1% F
 Wang, AS [42] Cross-sectional Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB HTN patients (N = 68) AMB HTN patients (N = 39) 68 ± 10 y; 54.1% F 60 ± 12 y; 33.3% F
 Wong, AS [71] Case-control Tertiary NT-proBNP AMB HF patients (N = 30) Healthy controls (N = 30) 64.1 ± 9.1 y 65.9 ± 6.7 y
 Wong, AS [58] Cross-sectional Tertiary NT-proBNP Cohort 1 + 2: AMB patients (N = 68 + N = 179) Cohort 1 + 2: AMB HFrEF patients (N = 115 + N = 145) Cohort 1/2: Cohort 1/2:
65.9 ± 12.9 y; 37.5% F 57.1 ± 11.1 y; 18.2% F
70.3 ± 11.0 y; 16.6% F
76.6 ± 9.0 y; 46.4% F
 Zile, USA [72] Case-control Primary and tertiary NT-proBNP (ChLIA) AMB patients (N = 61) Healthy controls (N = 241) 66 ± 1 y; 59% F 58 ± 1 y; 70% F
  1. Age depicted in mean ± standard deviation, median (IQR) or median (minimum-maximum)
  2. EU Europe, AS Asia, CA Canada, y years, pro-ANP pro-atrial natriuretic peptide, BNP brain natriuretic peptide, AMB ambulatory, F female, AF atrial fibrillation, DD diastolic dysfunction, FEIA fluorescence immunoassay, HF heart failure, NT-proBNP N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide, HFpEF heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, HTN hypertension, DOE dyspnoeic on exertion, HFrEF heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, NCD non-cardiac dyspnoea, Cath catheterization, CHF chronic heart failure, DHF diastolic heart failure, ChLIA chemiluminescence immunoassay
  3. *Reported for total study population
Back to article page

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us