CMAJ • September 12, 2006; 175 (6). doi:10.1503/cmaj.060236.
© 2006 CMA Media Inc. or its licensors
All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mark, D. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Felker, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mark, D. B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Heart failure
Right arrowRelated Articles

Natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of heart failure

G. Michael Felker, John W. Petersen and Daniel B. Mark

From the Outcomes Research Group, Duke Clinical Research Institute, and the Division of Cardiology and Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (all authors).


Figure 124
View larger version (48K):

[in a new window]
  		Box 1.

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
  		Table 1.

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
  		Table 2.

 

Figure 124
View larger version (23K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide fragment (NT-proBNP) in the PRIDE study involving 600 patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnea. Five possible decision thresholds are shown, ranging from 300 to 1000 pg/mL, with corresponding sensitivities and specificities. Reproduced, with permission, from Januzzi et al.21 © 2005 Elsevier. Additional data provided by Januzzi.

 

Figure 224
View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2: Performance of acute congestive heart failure score in the diagnosis of heart failure in the derivation cohort from the PRIDE study (light bars) and the validation cohort from New Zealand (dark bars). Modified, with permission, from Baggish et al.22

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
  		Table 3.

 

Figure 324
View larger version (22K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3: Nomogram version of Bayes' Theorem. Starting with a patient in whom the diagnosis is uncertain after clinical evaluation (e.g., pretest probability of 50%), a likelihood ratio of 10 or greater for a positive test result is required to rule in disease with reasonable certainty (i.e., post-test probability of 90% or greater), whereas a likelihood ratio of 0.10 or smaller for a negative test result is required to rule out disease with reasonable certainty (i.e., post-test probability of 10% or lower). Adapted, with permission, from Fagan TJ. Nomogram for Bayes' formula. N Engl J Med 1975;293:257. Copyright © 1975 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.